NY Times " Obama Not Up To The Task"

  • MrGiz
  • 08-08-2011, 08:31 PM
.... Only in your world would the truth be a weak defense. Originally Posted by Doove
Possible. And it's also possible that candidate Obama simply underestimated the radicalism of the Republican Party.
I knew you wouldn't let me down! *

Keep the Faith, Brother!! * Together with Hope... and Charity... especially from those you hate... you're still On Path! *
Free Marshall...Free Marshall....Free Marshall.....

Originally Posted by Whirlaway
Marshy, if you can read this, you had better get over to to Whirly's love nest quick! You two have a lot of catchin' up to do!
TexTushHog's Avatar
Actually, for those who will take the time to read the article, it's quite good and provides great explanation as to why Obama is failing. It's buried a bit but the first element of the story is that he's trying to compromise with Republicans. That is a fool's game. They are not interested in compromise generally, and that has never been more true that it is now.

When confronted with an adversary who will not compromise in politics, you must gain more votes. And that involves a battle for public support. That this is where Obama has been a stark disappointment to so many Democrats. He just doesn't know how to fight. The article correctly points out that politics, like trails in a courtroom, is a battle of competing narratives. Obama has allowed the Republicans to tell the story and he's fought his battle in the rhetorical framework built by the Republicans. The author is exactly on point.

I know that is not the way the Obama campaign (and probably White House) see it. They are telling their fund raisers that this is a triangulation type strategy. The play is that Obama bends over backwards to compromise with the R's again and again and gets rebuffed again and again. They think -- foolishly, I would argue -- that independents will eventually get sick or the Republican extremism. I would argue that between extremism and a coherent narrative versus perceived weakness and no story, they'll pick a the side that appears strong and has a story every time. I've seen it happen in a courtroom too often.

And the shame of it is that he's got a great story to tell. It's full of action, good guys and bad guys, moral values, conflict, etc. And most of the people agree with the values that Obama can endorse in the story. But if he won't tell it, nobody will care. They'll listen to the only storyteller in the room and buy all the bullshit about "runaway spending", "living within our means", analogies to family budgets and government budgets, etc. It's all a focus grouped load of horseshit, but it's the only story being told.
A case study in stupid is as stupid does.....(today's WSJ)

The aircraft was large, modern and considered among the world's safest. But that night it was flying straight into a huge thunderstorm. Turbulence was extreme, and airspeed indicators may not have been functioning properly. Worse, the pilots were incompetent. As the plane threatened to stall they panicked by pointing the nose up, losing speed when they ought to have done the opposite. It was all over in minutes.

Was this the fate of Flight 447, the Air France jet that plunged mysteriously into the Atlantic a couple of years ago? Could be. What I'm talking about here is the Obama presidency.

When it comes to piloting, Barack Obama seems to think he's the political equivalent of Charles Lindbergh, Chuck Yeager and—in a "Fly Me to the Moon" sort of way—Nat King Cole rolled into one. "I think I'm a better speech writer than my speech writers," he reportedly told an aide in 2008. "I know more about policies on any particular issue than my policy directors. And I'll tell you right now that I'm . . . a better political director than my political director."

On another occasion—at the 2004 Democratic convention—Mr. Obama explained to a Chicago Tribune reporter that "I'm LeBron, baby. I can play at this level. I got game."

Of course, it's tempting to be immodest when your admirers are so immodest about you. How many times have we heard it said that Mr. Obama is the smartest president ever? Even when he's criticized, his failures are usually chalked up to his supposed brilliance. Liberals say he's too cerebral for the Beltway rough-and-tumble; conservatives often seem to think his blunders, foreign and domestic, are all part of a cunning scheme to turn the U.S. into a combination of Finland, Cuba and Saudi Arabia.

I don't buy it. I just think the president isn't very bright.

Socrates taught that wisdom begins in the recognition of how little we know. Mr. Obama is perpetually intent on telling us how much he knows. Aristotle wrote that the type of intelligence most needed in politics is prudence, which in turn requires experience. Mr. Obama came to office with no experience. Plutarch warned that flattery "makes itself an obstacle and pestilence to great houses and great affairs."

Today's White House, more so than any in memory, is stuffed with flatterers.




Associated Press President Barack Obama


Much is made of the president's rhetorical gifts. This is the sort of thing that can be credited only by people who think that a command of English syntax is a mark of great intellectual distinction. Can anyone recall a memorable phrase from one of Mr. Obama's big speeches that didn't amount to cliché? As for the small speeches, such as the one we were kept waiting 50 minutes for yesterday, we get Triple-A bromides about America remaining a "Triple-A country." Which, when it comes to long-term sovereign debt, is precisely what we no longer are under Mr. Obama.

Then there is Mr. Obama as political tactician. He makes predictions that prove false. He makes promises he cannot honor. He raises expectations he cannot meet. He reneges on commitments made in private. He surrenders positions staked in public. He is absent from issues in which he has a duty to be involved. He is overbearing when he ought to be absent. At the height of the financial panic of 1907, Teddy Roosevelt, who had done much to bring the panic about by inveighing against big business, at least had the good sense to stick to his bear hunt and let J.P. Morgan sort things out. Not so this president, who puts a new twist on an old put-down: Every time he opens his mouth, he subtracts from the sum total of financial capital.

Then there's his habit of never trimming his sails, much less tacking to the prevailing wind. When Bill Clinton got hammered on health care, he reverted to centrist course and passed welfare reform. When it looked like the Iraq war was going to be lost, George Bush fired Don Rumsfeld and ordered the surge.
Mr. Obama, by contrast, appears to consider himself immune from error. Perhaps this explains why he has now doubled down on Heckuva Job Geithner. It also explains his insulting and politically inept habit of suggesting—whether the issue is health care, or Arab-Israeli peace, or change we can believe in at some point in God's good time—that the fault always lies in the failure of his audiences to listen attentively. It doesn't. In politics, a failure of communication is always the fault of the communicator.

Much of the media has spent the past decade obsessing about the malapropisms of George W. Bush, the ignorance of Sarah Palin, and perhaps soon the stupidity of Rick Perry. Nothing is so typical of middling minds than to harp on the intellectual deficiencies of the slightly less smart and considerably more successful.

But it takes actual smarts to understand that glibness and self-belief are not sufficient proof of genuine intelligence. Stupid is as stupid does, said the great philosopher Forrest Gump. The presidency of Barack
Obama is a case study in stupid does.

http://online.wsj.com/article/global_view.html
This Sunday's Review section, the liberal NYTs finally nailed it with what is wrong with Obama...and each day more and more Americans (notably Indepedents) are figuring it out ! The 2nd sentence is the key........
"A second possibility is that he is simply not up to the task by virtue of his lack of experience and a character defect that might not have been so debilitating at some other time in history. Those of us who were bewitched by his eloquence on the campaign trail chose to ignore some disquieting aspects of his biography: that he had accomplished very little before he ran for president, having never run a business or a state; that he had a singularly unremarkable career as a law professor, publishing nothing in 12 years at the University of Chicago other than an autobiography; and that, before joining the United States Senate, he had voted “present” (instead of “yea” or “nay”) 130 times, sometimes dodging difficult issues."

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/07/op...passion?&scp=1
Originally Posted by Whirlaway
Interesting article. Obama is really quite amazing though. He's one of the most unassuming presidents in history. His background is unlike other presidents. He didn't come from a wealthy family. His mother was white and his father was black. His mother was quite young when he was born she was 18. He was not born in the United States so he is not a natural born U.S. citizen which is a requirement to gain the office of President of the United States. Barack Obama was born in the Territory of Hawaii in 1957, which was not a state at the time. Hawaii became the 50th State in 1959. To be considered a Natural born U. S. citizen one or both parents must have been born in the Unite states and must have been a resident of the U.S. for at least ten years or at least five years after the age of sixteen. Barack's father was from Kenya and was born there and had never lived in the united states ever. Barack's mother was eighteen when Barack was born and she had'nt live in the United States for the past ten years. Barack didn't meet the Natural Born Citizen criteria to hold the office of President, but yet he is the President of the United States. All other past presidents had to meet that criteria. I wonder why.
wellendowed1911's Avatar
I didn't fold...the Obama zombies follow my posts around and bark bark bark like puppy dogs as entertainment for me.

Why don't you guys post a thread telling us what a great job Obama is doing with the economy, the war, the debt, health care, food stamps, employment, wages, the environment, yada yada....ya can't ! His administration has no accomplishements you want to brag on.....shit your guy presided over the shut down of space exploration !
I will brag on these Whirly: http://eee.eccie.net/showthread.php?...83#post1551183
I guess you could brag on all his WH social fun; or his golf game; or all the union thugs he has hosted at the WH......oh I know, tell us all about his fund raising.......

Oh well, nothing positive to say so why don't you Obama zombies just keep blaming everybody else............. Originally Posted by Whirlaway
And your guy presided over the biggest terrorist attack on American soil now what? Your President presided over 2 failing wars- one of which was fake. At least no Americans lives were lost in the shut down of space exploration can't say that about the Iraq War or Katrina can you?
http://eee.eccie.net/showthread.php?...83#post1551183
acp I can respect your comments- the administration needs to go in overhaul NOW- all these stupid meaningless post by WHIRL are just plain stupid- if he made all C's what are we going do now impeach him?

I like how Whirl left out the important points in the article that WTF pointed out- WHIRL is the most deceptive poster on here bar none! Originally Posted by wellendowed1911
Overhaul meaning what exactly. I think currency, maybe a change in our currency. Is that what you mean by overhaul?
Doove's Avatar
  • Doove
  • 08-09-2011, 04:37 PM
Interesting article. Obama is really quite amazing though. He's one of the most unassuming presidents in history. His background is unlike other presidents. He didn't come from a wealthy family. His mother was white and his father was black. His mother was quite young when he was born she was 18. Originally Posted by acp5762
And if he was a Republican, we'd be talking about his living the American Dream. Being a Democrat? Not so much.

He was not born in the United States so he is not a natural born U.S. citizen which is a requirement to gain the office of President of the United States. Barack Obama was born in the Territory of Hawaii in 1957, which was not a state at the time. Hawaii became the 50th State in 1959.
His 50th birthday was last Thursday. Do the math.

When you ignore even the easiest facts such as that, there really is no hope for you.
And if he was a Republican, we'd be talking about his living the American Dream. Being a Democrat? Not so much.



His 50th birthday was last Thursday. Do the math.

When you ignore even the easiest facts such as that, there really is no hope for you. Originally Posted by Doove
Ok he was born in 61, my bad. That small trivial fact really doesn't change the meaning of the post. It makes no difference what his political party is either. I am a registered democrat myself.
Raphael's Avatar
Obama's weakness and ineptitude was obvious from the start of his primary campaign. It is not a functional system that allows back benchers a shot at the Presidency.

His chances of winning the big prize in 2008 were considerably boosted, however, by John McCain's botched reponse to the financial catastrophy of that year and by a choice of a running mate so irresponsible as to make Joe Biden look like a serious adult - and Obama like a genius.
Doove's Avatar
  • Doove
  • 08-09-2011, 06:12 PM
Ok he was born in 61, my bad. That small trivial fact really doesn't change the meaning of the post. Originally Posted by acp5762
2/3 of your post dealt with his not being born in this country based on the date of his birth. So it absolutely does change the meaning of your post - and how you can say otherwise is impossible to comprehend. And beyond that, your willingness to ignore even simple obvious facts says a lot about your position overall.
  • MrGiz
  • 08-09-2011, 06:37 PM
.....And beyond that, your willingness to ignore even simple obvious facts says a lot about your position overall. Originally Posted by Doove
Yeah.... kinda like we cannot continue to spend imaginary money that we do not have!!

But then again.... that doesn't appear to be obvious! to some!!

(let me guess what your answer is gonna be) Some bullshit to do with Bush , and his evil, rich, Republican meanies...right? Same olde childish, driveling shit!
2/3 of your post dealt with his not being born in this country based on the date of his birth. So it absolutely does change the meaning of your post - and how you can say otherwise is impossible to comprehend. And beyond that, your willingness to ignore even simple obvious facts says a lot about your position overall. Originally Posted by Doove
I don't know I remember reading he was born in 57. This guys got all kinds of tricks.
WTF's Avatar
  • WTF
  • 08-09-2011, 07:12 PM
I don't know I remember reading he was born in 57. This guys got all kinds of tricks. Originally Posted by acp5762
It is why some of you have a hard time with facts....you let what you believe to be true get in the way of what actually is true.
Doove's Avatar
  • Doove
  • 08-09-2011, 07:50 PM
And beyond that, your willingness to ignore even simple obvious facts says a lot about your position overall. Originally Posted by Doove
Yeah.... kinda like we cannot continue to spend imaginary money that we do not have!!

But then again.... that doesn't appear to be obvious! to some!! Originally Posted by MrGiz
Seems you don't know the difference between a fact and a position that's based on an individual's interpretation of facts. So i'm not sure why you felt the need to post that in response to my comment.

Actually, i do; because you had to come up with something.

(let me guess what your answer is gonna be)Some bullshit to do with Bush , and his evil, rich, Republican meanies...right? Same olde childish, driveling shit!
As usual, you're wrong again.