Cheerleading Divisiveness and Stagnation?

Who would do that?
Law professor Ann Althouse listened to the President today:

"And I just want to point out, this was a central question during the election. It was debated over and over again. And on Tuesday night, we found out that the majority of Americans agree with my approach. And that includes Democrats, independents and a lot of Republicans across the country, as well as independent economists and budget experts."

But she still has trouble understanding:

Is that the way elections work? There's a struggle right now to impose an interpretation on the election. One man got more votes than the other. We were put in the position of having to vote for one man or other other [sic]. But how does that translate into what we want on particular issues? It translates through the power-holders insisting on the meaning they like. We still get to fight back. The interpretive process never ends.

Oh please...
I think the voters voted for it to end already, Professor. That much is loud and clear. No "translation" necessary.

When a problem comes along, you must whip it...

now whip it...
into shape.
shape it up.
get it straight.
go forward.
move ahead.
try to detect it
it's not too late...
to whip it
whip it good.

~Devo.