Differing expectations

I received an email from someone commenting on the bizarre fact that, in the wake of the November elections, it’s the winners who are whining, not the losers.  Putting aside the fact that the losers this time around (that would be conservatives) are a different caliber from the losers in the last to Presidential elections, in that they seek to correct their own failings, rather than pinning the blame on others, I think there’s also a matter of differing perspectives.

Conservatives were concerned that Obama would set them up for instant Armageddon vis a vis the Islamists in Iraq.  That he is pursuing Bush’s course is a great relief, and not something that’s going to incline them to whine.  (We’ll get to that once Obama starts fiddling with the economy.)

Liberals, however, had very different expectations.  Consistent with electing the Messiah, they expected instant troop withdrawal (even though the big O’s not even President), an instant recognition of gay marriage, instant redistribution of wealth, etc.  Rational Obama supporters understand that there is always a divide between a candidate’s promises and his acts — although I suspect Obama’s divide will be more in the nature of a chasm.  For the true believers, however, who actually expected God-like miracles from a man who hasn’t even yet taken office, his every expression of rationality, pragmatism, or bipartisanship is a crushing blow.  Hence the whining.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments

  1. Tiresias says

    It strikes me as entirely unbizarre – it’s always liberals who whine.

    Conservatives whine when there’s reason: like when JFK stole the election in 1960, or Franken gets away with stealing his now. But whining for liberals is the fallback position, for everything. As you point out: they won. They’re still not happy.

  2. says

    before Nov4, i had thought that if McCain wins, those voting for him already expect to be disappointed. i also thought that if Obama wins, those voting for him will come to be disaappointed. sure enough.

  3. says

    As you know, I voted for Obama. But I don’t expect him to actually do anything before he’s sworn in as POTUS. And I think anyone who does, regardless of whom he/she voted for, is being unrealistic.

    The only thing I’ve been complaining about is our current POTUS, who – after eight long years of warning – can’t seem to dodge a flying shoe. LOL

  4. Charles Martel says

    Helen:

    It is always important to edit before you click on the “Post” button. To wit:

    — He did dodge a flying shoe. Two of them, in fact. That is the meaning of “dodge:” the successful avoidance of being hit by an object that’s hurtling at you.

    — For a “Christian” you sure seem to take enjoyment in an assault upon a president. Apparently since you’ve “chosen happiness,” as you say on another thread, part of being happy is taking pleasure in seeing somebody you dislike humiliated.

  5. Danny Lemieux says

    Helen, I would be curious to know whether you believe that President Obama has the right to expect more, as much, or less respect as President from conservatives, as Liberal/Lefties accorded President Bush during his tenure. What say you? Second question…why?

  6. 1Lulu says

    The culturally revealing German term Schadenfreude- defined as delighting in the suffering of another, in other words, Helen’s delight in George Bush getting a shoe chucked at him (which he did dodge, successfully). And thanks to our wonderful democracy the shoe chucker is not in a cell somewhere being tortured to death as he would be if he chucked a shoe at Saddam or any other Arab leader).

    Danny, of course not. Bush deserved his hatred because he was the human embodiment of evil, don’t you see? Not bin Laden, or the gun toting maniacs in India, or Hamas or Hezbollah, but Bush who deserves all condemnation and ire. Therefore, don’t expect Oliver Stone to make a movie about Obama (entited “Hussein” or “H” or “Barry”?), or HBO to make movies about his questionable associations, or comedians to mock Obama’s speaking style or inconsistencies, because Obama does not embody evil. He embodies our liberation from it. After all, whenever there is a demon, there must be an angel to liberate us.

    And finally, Danny, I expect Conservatives to fight Obama on the facts and issues and not just make sweeping judgments, insults, and blanket hostile statements as “Progressives” have made for the last 8 years. But I think that Obama will have to fall from the heavenly platform he has been put on by his admirers. He could stay there as long as he was running for office because he wasn’t directing policy or doing anything- he was just saying anything. I do not believe he will ever be demonized like Bush was, by either side, but there will be disillusionment on the Left as reality seeps into projection fantasies.

  7. Oldflyer says

    Book I am afraid our time to whine (or cry) will come soon enough.

    Helen probably hasn’t noticed that Obama has completed his cabinet selections, so there are some actions to measure him by. Of more concern, he is doing daily press conferences but dodges all questions on matters of substance. I know, I know, he would say we can only have one President at a time. But then, why the daily appearances befoe the camera?

    Someone suggested that he really enjoys playing like a President. It will be interesting to see how he holds up after the game actually begins.

    Off topic a bit. But as I watched our current President, who has aged so much, announcing his auto bail-out I knew he was going to take more grief. But, even though I disagree (again) with his decision, I never for a moment doubted that he was doing what he thought best. Of course the blabbers tonight are saying he kicked the ball over to Obama because he didn’t want the auto failure on his watch. Their comments do not surprise me in the least. Oh, Bushey, I will miss you so much. God speed.

  8. Ymarsakar says

    Apparently since you’ve “chosen happiness,” as you say on another thread, part of being happy is taking pleasure in seeing somebody you dislike humiliated.

    Helen thinks of herself as a productive sheep, so she doesn’t really care about the consequences of violence or assault. We, the ones who have studied and trained in such things, know very well the real consequences to human life and limb. But she doesn’t care, because she can afford not to. We cannot.

    Sometimes it is very tiresome to always be the adult in a room full of children, Charles.

  9. Ymarsakar says

    Bush was never ruthlessness enough for my tastes. He has done great good for this country, but he has also allowed internal insurgents and domestic traitors to escape and prosper. That, I can forgive him if it had only harmed me, but it doesn’t only harm me. It harms the military, it harms our families, it harms the children of every American and every immigrant. I cannot forget or forgive that fact.

    The kind of President I would want in office, Reagan would do or Sarah, would make our enemies Howl. The Left needs to be shown reality so that they can never lie about it ever again.

  10. Ymarsakar says

    Btw, Obama is a macroscopic example of Jonestown. Whenever you have a cult, the damage it can done is magnified depending upon a couple of factors: 1. whether you can escape from it 2. whether you can change the leadership of the cult and 3. how much internal controls have been put in place to control the members of the cult.

    Obama may start “moderate”, but as his policies create more and more pain, will he do as a Clinton and start working with Republicans to get some kind of “Peace Dividend” to buy more votes with? Or will he act out and increase oppression in order to eliminate competitive ideas and politics?

    It has been shown in history time and time again that totalitarian regimes do not like competition. The Left doesn’t like the US ROTC program precisely because it competes for the minds and hearts of the next generation directly with Leftist indoctrination. Obama has found ways to take off the ballot his political opponents time and time again. Can he do the same to the American people when Americans start voicing how Obama’s policies are destroying their lives?

    The Left says “nothing can be worst than Bush”. Given that the Left saw Che and Pol Pot as “good guys”, you have to understand what the Left means by “worst”. They don’t mean bad things, as we mean it, when they talk about Bush messing up this country. No, the really bad things will happen when the Left starts talking about America recovering her strength, glory, and power. Watch that when it happens. THey have a consistent history of accusing the Republicans and their political enemies of doing the exact same things that they themselves did first. Support of torture, support of warrantless wiretaping, support of illegal breaking and entering (Elian Gonsales) and various other shenanigans.

  11. says

    Danny,

    RE: “Helen, I would be curious to know whether you believe that President Obama has the right to expect more, as much, or less respect as President from conservatives, as Liberal/Lefties accorded President Bush during his tenure. What say you? Second question…why?”

    I would say, you reap what you sow, so he should get what he earns. Nothing more, nothing less. But he isn’t the President yet. Sure, he’s selected his cabinet (or at least, most of it), but no one in his “administration” has done anything yet. Bush has been treated the way he has due to his actions. Obama is not Bush and not yet president. This should be a period or silence and hope.

    Charles,

    RE: “For a “Christian” you sure seem to take enjoyment in an assault upon a president. Apparently since you’ve “chosen happiness,” as you say on another thread, part of being happy is taking pleasure in seeing somebody you dislike humiliated.”

    He is humiliated because of his actions. I don’t take pleasure in his actions or the insult that comes to the US because he is POTUS. What does my being a Christian have to do with Bush’s behavior? I didn’t vote for him, opposed his war, and can’t wait for him to move back to Texas. The world is big enough for both of us. I just hope Obama can bring respect back to the US.

    Y., RE: “Helen thinks of herself as a productive sheep.”

    Thanks for clearing that up. I’d wondered about it but my lack of logic didn’t let get quite there. :-)

  12. Oldflyer says

    Helen, surely you jest when you say that Bush has been treated as he has because of his actions. Could it possibly be that your memory is so short-term that you cannot remember back to December 2000? Bush has been treated disgracefully by the so-called liberal segment of our society, aided and abetted by the so-called news media, from before he ever took the oath.

    Don’t insult us.

    On a more positive note, my wife and I depart for California on Sunday to spend the holidays surrounded by children and grandchildren (provided that the fierce winter weather that I am told is simply another symptom of global warming does not interfere).

    Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to the folks who make this a most interesting site.

  13. Charles Martel says

    What does my being a Christian have to do with Bush’s behavior?

    Honest, Helen, you are one of the most morally tone-deaf people I have ever encountered online.

    My observation about you being a so-called Christian has nothing to do with Bush’s behavior. It has everything to do with the obvious pleasure you took in his being assaulted.

  14. Ymarsakar says

    Honest, Helen, you are one of the most morally tone-deaf people I have ever encountered online.

    Come on, Charles. How can that be? Helen was one of us, don’t you remember? She believed exactly the things that we believed. So how can she be the “most morally tone-deaf” person you have ever encountered? If it is true that she believed exactly what we did, then wouldn’t that mean she would know exactly the way we were thinking and be tone perceptive?

    I would say, you reap what you sow

    But you said it isn’t very important where the food comes from, so long as people are fed. What does it matter to you how much was reaped and how much was sown then? So long as Obama does what you want him to do, what does anything else matter? And so long as Bush was not doing as you wanted him to do, isn’t true that you never really cared about what Bush sowed?

    I’d wondered about it but my lack of logic didn’t let get quite there.

    I supposed you missed the Jesus Christ reference as well. There goes poetry standards these days.

    Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to the folks who make this a most interesting site.

    Merry Christmas to you and yours, Oldflyer.

  15. Ymarsakar says

    In case you need a translation, Helen, the “Sheep” is classically used to refer to Jesus Christ in poetry of a biblical inspiration. You think of yourself as a follower of Jesus Christ, a pacifist, and so forth. What you think is wrong, however.

    Let’s make that very clear here. You think of yourself as generous, compassionate, and loving, but in reality, you are no Jesus Christ, Helen.

  16. Ellen says

    Helen forgets that from the very first day of his presidency, and even before then, Bush was in the cross hairs of the media. They NEVER gave him the benefit of the doubt.

  17. suek says

    >>…the “Sheep” is classically used to refer to Jesus Christ in poetry of a biblical inspiration>>

    Actually, Y, the “Lamb” is used to refer to Jesus Christ. The “Sheep” are usually his followers – his flock. Even though a lamb is a baby sheep, they’re not the same in this sort of reference.

    References that allow all sorts of inferences – both good and bad – but a lot of that is because most of us today are so disconnected from the herding or even farm life. The examples and comparisons are mostly meaningless to most of us today.

    >>I just hope Obama can bring respect back to the US.>>

    I doubt it. He wants us to become a doormat for the world, and nobody respects a doormat.

  18. Ymarsakar says

    Thanks for the correction, Suek. I excuse my mistake on the basis that, unlike Helen, I don’t write poetry and I don’t read it much. I focus my energies on other things, like war, history, strategy, violence, deception, politics, and sociology. In that vein…

    Far be it for me to say that Helen is an adult, especially when I am not using her definition of what an adult is or does. And this provides a better ability for me to distinguish Helen, as a supposed follower of Jesus Christ (a productive sheep), and Helen as not being Jesus Christ (the Lamb): in the sense that Helen does not share Christ’s attributes of charity, knowledge and acceptance of Roman retribution, and self-sacrifice as a virtue.

  19. suek says

    No excuse necessary. If I recall correctly, your mother tongue was not English.
    Idioms are weird and frequently fun – they arise from cultural aspects that may be general to humanity, or unique to a particular culture which may even be unique according to a particular subset within a larger culture. An idiom can mean one thing to one person and another to a person from another group. I find them fascinating! and trying to learn the source of them…that’s even more fun, when it’s possible! Sometimes they’re so far back that everyone’s forgotten whence they came, and sometimes they get twisted in a way that has them understood in a way entirely different from their original interpretation.
    There’s probably some discipline that studies that kind of thing, but if so, I don’t know what it is. It isn’t really etymology because it’s about cultural interpretation of words or phrases as opposed to general interpretation, but maybe a branch of etymology.

  20. Ymarsakar says

    Ellen, I don’t think Helen forgot that. I think she keeps it locked away in a very tight compartment separate from her usual thoughts. It is like whenever something unpleasant happens and you just “push it to the back of your mind” and not think about it any more.

    If I recall correctly, your mother tongue was not English.

    That’s no excuse. I did a paper on William Blake and how he used the two themes of innocence and experience to metaphorically refer to Jesus Christ (as innocence and “The Lamb”) in comparison with Satan, the Devil, the Fall of Humanity from the Garden of Eve (post-lapsarian conditions) as “experienced” (check out “The Tyger”).

    This reference is known to me, but I didn’t catch that when I used the word “sheep” that it wasn’t exactly the same as the Lamb. Sheep is plural, after all, and I used it in the context of referring to many many Helens and fake liberals and progressives and Leftists.

    There’s probably some discipline that studies that kind of thing, but if so, I don’t know what it is.

    Etymology comes pretty close. Remember my comment on paradise, a word Xenophon got from the Persians for “enclosed space”?

    A branch of etymology, in your sense, would branch off into sociology and even anthropology.

  21. suek says

    >>Sheep is plural>>

    “Sheep” is both singular and plural. “Lamb” refers to an age differential – or food on the table. So you’d say “how many sheep in your flock”, or “is that your sheep?” In the first case, it would probably be plural, and in the second case, singular. It is the truth, though, that one sheep is a lonely critter – they do usually come in more than one.
    Lamb – even when it’s food on the table – refers to an immature ovine. When it’s on the table (as food), the immature dinner is called lamb, the mature dinner is mutton. The term sheep is further broken down by sex – ewe is the female, ram is the male, wether is the neutered male. And as juveniles, you have ewe lambs, ram lambs and wethers. Don’t ask me why they don’t have wether lambs – I don’t know. They just don’t. I have a feeling it’s due to syllabication (if that’s a word) – too many syllables in wether lamb…doesn’t sound right.

    All of which is probably more than you’ll ever need to know.

    Humor away!

  22. Ymarsakar says

    And this is why I don’t like Helen’s adult way of speaking: “figurative language”. I prefer straight talking rather than ambiguous meaning. Maybe because I am better at the former than the latter, but that may not even be true in the first place.

  23. Charles Martel says

    Speaking of, “rama lamba ding-dong” has got to be one of the greatest pop refrains in history.

    I understand that the B side tried to use “wether ewe want me or not, I’ll be there” but people didn’t go for it.

  24. Ymarsakar says

    Charles, I wish had an ego as big as Barack Obama and most of the Leftists. That way, I could just say to suek, “I am right, and you are wrong. Finito.”

  25. suek says

    >>That way, I could just say to suek, “I am right, and you are wrong. Finito.”>>

    Heh. My husband’s been saying that for some 50 years now. Hasn’t done him much good – I still argue with him – if it’s something worth arguing about!

    There’s nothing quite like stating a point, being told you’re wrong, and then have it come out that you’re right. Life doesn’t usually work that way, but every once in a while…!!!

  26. Charles Martel says

    suek, years and years ago I was in a college English class and this very fetching young black woman (I was very attracted!) and I got into an earnest discussion about whether the races should merge their civil rights efforts or go it alone.

    I contended that the civil rights movement should have blacks and whites working together. She contended that blacks should become separatists and struggle for their rights with no white help. She said the races simply should not collaborate (I think because she feared whites trying to take over).

    As the discussion — and it was very civil and respctful — continued, she shifted into her feminist mode. She was very much the feminist as well as a Black Power advocate, and her eyes misted over and got that faraway look as she talked about a “grand movement of all the women in the world uniting to assert their rights.”

    I coughed real hard and said, “But!” to bring her back to earth.

    “But what?” she asked.

    “But what about the fact that women will have to cross racial boundaries to form your grand coalition?”

    Pow! Bam! Boom! Her eyes got as big as I’ve ever seen human eyes get. (Speaking of, you should see my boxer dog Lily’s huge peepers. Talk about big!) Of course there was nothing she could say; she’d been hoist with her own petard.

    I did not gloat or try to press my advantage. She saw for herself that she’d stepped in it. I just said, “There’s a lot to think about when the whole human race is involved,” and let it go at that.

    We later had other talks. I don’t think she made any big conceptual leaps as a result of them, but she did seem a little more thoughtful.

    (No, she never liked me back that way.)

  27. Ymarsakar says

    Some people just love to have “separate compartments” in which they like to keep their deep thoughts. They never realize that compartmentalization decreases their ability to make connections.

  28. Mike Devx says

    Oldflyer #7
    >> But as I watched our current President, who has aged so much, announcing his auto bail-out I knew he was going to take more grief. But, even though I disagree (again) with his decision, I never for a moment doubted that he was doing what he thought best. >>

    I wish I could be as kind as you. I “never for a moment doubt” that Obama is doing what he thinks best, as well. I agree that Bush doesn’t doubt and does his best as well, but I can’t accept it. He goes along with every big-government solution that is presented to him. He’s a natural at big-government solutions. He never actually sticks up for free-market solutions nor conservative solutions. He mouths words about “if I had my choice, I wouldn’t support this, but reluctantly I must go along with it.” Aside from steadfast support for the war, I can’t think of any decision of his that’s been conservative where he hasn’t been dragged kicking and screaming to it. Conservative Supreme Court selections is one you might cite, but I ask you to remember Harriet Myers.

    Trying to foster democracy via the military might be conservative. I’m still not too sure about that one. The “fostering of democracy” part I agree with; whether allowing radical jihadists the opportunity to take over, ie Hamas, is something I remain quite dubious about.

    In sum, I’m glad you grant Bush Godspeed, because that balances out my own hearty “Good riddance”.

  29. suek says

    >>I “never for a moment doubt” that Obama is doing what he thinks best, as well.>>

    Hmmm. I disagree. At least in the sense that I think that Bush genuinely believes that what he does is best for the country. I think that what Obama does is what he believes is best for Obama. Maybe not. I think Obama is calculating and makes the “best” decision based on the outcome he wants rather than by a moral standard. In that sense, I’d have to agree with you.

    I guess it all depends on how you interpret “best”.

    I do agree with you, though, that Bush has made “compassionate conservative” a dirty word. At least as far as I’m concerned. He’d have made a fine Democrat some 50 years ago. He’s certainly not the conservative I had in mind. And he has been right about the terrorist decisions, imo. I’m very concerned about Obama and islam. I think he – at the very least – considers them as not a threat. I think that’s a big mistake.

  30. Danny Lemieux says

    And what is good for Obama, Suek, is good for the ‘bi-partisan” pigs-at-the-trough Chicago Combine.

    Here’s another great insight from Chicago Tribune columnist John Kass on Obama’s planned multi-$billion plan to pave-over America in the name of public works: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-kass-bd-deadmeatdec21,0,2882820.column

    I hope the day comes when the hope-change Liberals realize just what they have done to their/our country.

Leave a Reply