66 Replies to “Obama: Not Unfocused Enough”

  2. democrats.org/page/s/submitslogan
    So I sent the DNC my suggestion for a billboard slogan:
    “When You Have No Clue, Find a Scapegoat.”
    You think they’ll use that one?
    Then it went to a page for donations. I would have given, but there was nowhere to check “support Jesse Jackson’s illegitimate offspring” or “pork going straight to Chicago DNC vacation fund.”

  3. Obama just don’t get it, but anyone over $250,000 does.
    I want to see Obama’s Harvard Transcripts, be real curious to see what he made in Economics 101.
    Not to mention; wonder what Tiger, Halley, Morgan or Whoopi thinks of this Tax-the-hell-out-of-the-Rich Liberal Socialist Affirmative Action President.
    ,

  4. Obama will soon learn the basic rule of Socialist economics – Sooner or later you run out of other people’s money to spend.
    Americans are, for the most part, practical people and are starting to see past the rhetoric, past the teleprompter talking points and are realizing they have actually let loose a fox in their economic hen house instead of a wealth building rooster.
    Mid term elections = salvation at hand.

  5. democrats.org/page/s/submitslogan
    I just sent them “One Big Ass Mistake America”
    LOL I bet that one is used right away!!!!

  8. Seriously, who didn’t see this coming? His whole campaign screamed empty suit and indecisiveness.

  9. Fred, don’t think that Obama and his team aren’t, now, preparing for the midterm elections.
    Obama has no capacity to govern. Anything. It isn’t simply that he doesn’t have the experience, and that ‘all he needs is the time to gain that experience’. It is that he is intellectually and psychologically unable to govern.
    He’s only able to act as an elite mediator to emotionally inflame an underdog population to act on a specific agenda. The population has to be defined as ‘victim’; they will act against ‘the Evil Other’. We saw this in his campaign, with his emotional hype of ‘hope and change’. This was evident in his years as a community organizer. His two years in Senate were passive networking.
    He is not someone who analyzes the economy, the political structure, the fiscal structure etc and then, develops policies to better these structures. He can’t ‘bond’ with such an action. It’s as if his mind goes utterly blank when confronted with a requirement to analyze a policy and its real results . That’s also why he can’t handle live press conferences. He can’t think about policies and programs.
    He can only ‘bond’ with a situation in which he is dominant and others are dependent on him.
    You may ask – well, doesn’t being the President answer such a psychological need? Yes and No. Yes, because it puts him in a Sovereign mode. But no, because a President is supposed to empower the people. And his psychological need is to disable them.
    At the moment, his lack of realistic and pragmatic policies and programs is just starting to emerge. A sensible president would get a team together that covers his inability to develop policies and programs. WHY, WHY, didn’t he do this? Just as puzzling, where were his staff, experts at protocol, who could have prevented Obama and Michelle’s insulting behaviour to the British PM?
    I can only suggest that he can’t have people around him whom he feels are superior to him. He can’t handle dissent – if he, Obama, comes up with a suggestion, he can’t handle criticism.
    All we know is that he hasn’t come up with viable solutions to real, current problems. He’s introducing diversions – such as health care and education and stem cell. He’s insisting that everything must be passed because ‘it’s a crisis’ and insisting that his methods (health care, etc) will solve the crisis…even though they have nothing to do with the banks and the fiscal situation.
    He’s blaming others – the Bush administration – and any and all who criticize him. The waste of time and effort on going after – how many is it now? Hannity, Cramer, Limbaugh..anyone who criticizes him – the White House attacks. The economy is falling apart – and Obama’s team focuses on ‘getting back’ at dissenters.
    I suspect that this will increase. The Blame will increase.
    The midterm elections? I’m going to speculate that Obama will try to increase class and racial divisions and lump Americans into these groups and pit them against each other. Black vs white, wealthy vs ‘poor’.
    The Republicans, if they are doing it with intent, are very, very wise now, NOT to have a particular Republican leader – because Obama and the Democrats will focus on that one person. Instead – the wise strategy is to allow full voice to dissent, questioners, complaints…without any one leading voice.

  11. A perfect storm….
    …….today The ONE’s Attorney General, Holder, has added to the fire…..
    He announced intent to impose a PERMANENT ban on ALL semi-automatics….rifles,carbines, pistols…
    I got that from the RNC (through newsmax)….the NRA will react predictably…
    Democratic solidarity is already breaking up faster than a Palmer Peninsula ice shelf…..2010 is getting ever closer…..and the Democratic members of Congress are painfully aware of that.
    The firearms community still bitterly remembers Clinton’s short lived “ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN” which like a trojan horse was morphed into a ban on semi-s. That died quietly when it’s sunset date arrived and no apparent benefit was evident.

  12. I take umbrage with all of you for picking on ‘The One’ and his level of experience.
    He has experience in spades. He himself told us so. Community organizations for starters. And who can forget that he ran a ‘campaign’ with over 20,000 people. You can’t buy that kind of experience.
    er,…maybe he did.

  13. What else should anyone have expected of a guy with but a fraction of the experience of the supposedly inexperienced Sarah Palin.

  15. ET: He’s only able to act as an elite mediator to emotionally inflame an underdog population to act on a specific agenda.
    Ah ha, got ya. He’s a … marxist!!!!
    A lazy bastard marxist who read the Coles Notes Manifesto, but a marxist!!!
    Or a post-marxist, if you will. Like he’s post-racial, post partisan.
    post = a prefix affixed to words suggesting, “heh, we’ve outgrown that” but which in fact means, EVEN MORE. I mean, for example, how can you be post-modern. You can only be even more modern than before. My old man was once modern; but I became even more modern; my daughters more modern yet.

  16. For 6+ years we listened to the same people whom are giving ‘BHO’ sound advice. So far in -50 days, they haven’t came out to well.
    an old saying; ‘the speed of the leader rates the rest of the pack’
    So far his pack is coming off in pretty bad light.

  19. oh, for heaven’s sake, me no dhimmi, just because one uses the terms ‘underdog population’ doesn’t mean that this is a Marxist analysis. It would be nice if you knew something about Marxism but your frequent comments show that you don’t.
    The notion of a set of a population without or with very little political power has been analyzed by such ancients as Plato and Aristotle. Was their analysis Marxist? Of course not. How about analyses of the noble/peasant infrastructure of the feudal era – let’s say, by Braudel. Was he a Marxist? What about Hobbes and Locke and their analyses of the relation between the governing set and the governed?
    As for ‘postmodernism’ it is just a specific term used for descriptions of the world (I hate to call them analyses) that reject an objective perspective, while ‘modernism’ is used to describe viewing reality within the objective perspective, i.e., as something real and ‘other’ to yourself.
    Nothing to do with any linear temporality of pre or post. The use of ‘postmodern’ is, I suspect, to suggest progressive superiority rather than its real nature of regressive sophistry.

  20. If it walks like a marxist, talks like a marxist, is mentored by a marxist, develops education programs with a marxist, and is preached to by a marxist, then in the eyes of the MSM, it must be a moderate!

  21. You right wingers are so off
    If i were you i would never expect Repugs ever to be in power again.
    republicans amde the mess now the cleanup crew is on the job deal with it

  22. His country is in the middle of an economic crisis and where’s Obama in the ME smoosing with the Islamists. Everytime a crisis pops up he cuts and runs leaving the Media fawning in his wake. He is not qualified to be President, MSM is the sole reason Obama got elected and as things sour in the US they are going to have to print the truth. It’s only a matter of time, he’s a cut and run president with thin skin.

  23. I always respected Warren Buffet. That he owns Dairy Queen makes him one of the good guys.
    If Obama can afford to toss Buffet under the bus, then I guess there really is not much hope for the rest of us.
    As Michelle Antoinette used to say “Let them eat Peanut Buster Parfait”.

  24. ET, how would you compare Obama to Paul Martin? To Mr. Dithers everything was a priority so nothing got done. My brother-inlaw was president of Canada Steamships and said Martin was the same there. Incredibly hard to get him to focus on an agenda and delegate responsibility. Sounds a lot like BO.
    Both seemed to have wonderful plans but never achieved anything. Remember how Martin would squirm whenever he was forced to answer a question with a definitive answer.

  25. Re:” I want to see Obama’s Harvard Transcripts, be real curious to see what he made in Economics 101.” — and I would like to see the undergraduate transripts that allowed him to get into Harvard in the first place. I believe that someone paved the way for him.
    On another note, it is my guess that the Canadian media will be the last to abandon the Obama bandwagon.

  26. Agreed, Obama does cut and run. He blames others and won’t deal with real problems. He can only focus on utopian ‘word projects’; i.e., projects than exist in word only, and can be talked about endlessly. But a real, on the ground situation, that requires policies and specific detailed programs – Obama can’t deal with that. He’s confined to words.
    Here’s yet another succinct analysis.
    Obama Talks a Lot
    A quote: “Obama not only expresses himself well, words are his primary tools and weapons for mass manipulation. After all, there is nothing “executive” in Obama’s history; only a history of selling himself and his rhetoric for votes”.
    My own view is that Obama is NOT a great orator. He’s a great performer of lines. That is, he can read a speech very well. BUT, he can’t, on his own, from his own thoughts, his own current thinking, speak to an audience. He can’t think through a question and answer it thoughtfully.
    Compare, just as an example, how Stephen Harper answers ad hoc questions put to him. He thinks; he answers to the point; his answers are reasoned. Obama is utterly incapable of doing this basic act..of thinking.
    All he can do is ‘make other people’ do things..but these things are actions utterly dependent on Obama. They aren’t actions generated by all these people themselves. Obama turns people into passive, dependent puppets.

  27. The guy can’t even fill his cabinet…They either are unwilling to join, fearing the guillotine that awaits them because of Obama’s economic suicide mission or they are crooks who don’t pay their taxes.
    There’s very strong evidence the guy was not even born in the US or at the very least was born to a British citizen father which anuls his “natural born” requirement to be Potus.
    This potential afront on the US constitution is picking up steam daily and will increase proportionally as Obama’s popularity decreases. This issue might be the catalyst used to remove him from office BEFORE his first term. It could be framed to the population as a “flaw” in the selection process for nominees and if his popularity is in the gutter at the time it will minimize civil unrest from his by then minority of supporters.
    Google: “World Net Daily” of “Orly Taitz” for more info if you are interested about Obama’s strange and worrisome obsession and fight to keep his true birth certificate, medical and education papers sealed away from public view.
    The guy is already exhausted and is gaffe prone after a measly 50 first days. He might crack sooner than most think: He had to take this past weekend off with Michelle at Camp David while Rome is burning.
    Word of advice: Cut the numerous ’till dawn parties at the White House and you might be more energised to do your work.
    I agree with E.T and others and I predicted this before the election results: The challenges at hand are way to big for narcissist Obama.
    Barrack Obama: Possibly the worst choice ever for President at a very critical time in history.

  29. Right Honourable – my own view is that the issue of Obama’s birth is not relevant. The Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court swore him into office. That, to me, effectively ends the issue.
    I agree that Obama is intellectually, emotionally and psychologically unfit to be president or indeed, to hold any executive and responsible position. His pathological narcissism means that he is unable to free ‘himself from himself’ and develop realistic policies and programs that enhance rather than disable other people.
    His requirement for others to be dependent means that he cannot provide policies and programs that move out of the verbal phase. He also can’t enable people therefore, he must keep people dependent on him and looking to him for help.
    In addition, he can’t provide a policy that is vulnerable to criticism. Therefore, either he delegates the policy development to others (Pelosi and Reid) and blames them for the results. Or there are no policies and he blames Bush and ‘the past’ for this failure. Or he focuses his attention of dissenters – and that’a a great billboard, kate – but he can’t strengthen people to ‘stand on their own’. They must be constantly dependent on Obama.
    How long can this charade be maintained? And when will what I predict will be a desperate move, the inflaming of class and race, as a tactic for Obama to retain power..come into play? Will it? I hope I’m wrong.

  30. “Right Honourable – my own view is that the issue of Obama’s birth is not relevant. The Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court swore him into office. That, to me, effectively ends the issue.”
    Lawfully (According to you), it might end the issue but would not be accepted by at least the proportion of citizens who did not vote for him. The “natural born citizen” clause of the constitution might be “so 1776” like you stated on another thread but it is still valid until it’s amended and it must be respected. Why did John McCain have to provide such documents which were requested during the election campaign in which he delivered right away?
    If a citizen acquires a passport for example and it is proven that said person provided a fake birth certificate or other bogus document or attestation, that passport will be revoked.
    In Obama’s case, for what I know, is that the selection process is not scrutinized properly. Reader’s digest version: Obama just checked “US Citizen” on his application for nominee. No further investigation was done. The guy lied and got away with it. I suspect he was also “helped” through thought.
    If “swaring him in” is enough, why won’t he just provide his real birth certificate that shows which hospital and which doctor delivered him? Or at least his medical records or school papers? Why is he just making this issue get bigger and bigger?
    IMO: OBAMA IS AN USURPER!!!

  31. Right honourable – I don’t think I said ‘so 1776’. That’s not my style of writing or thinking. That date happens to be a key date and I’m hardly one to denigrate it, or the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution, both of which are magnificent testimonies of reason and freedom and faith.
    I agree that the requirement for natural born citizenship is valid. But, my point is that I don’t think there is much hope for Obama being taken out on this factor because the evidence, even if it exists, isn’t readily available. And I doubt if it will ever be available – and – if something turns up, it will be held up in the courts for years.
    I think that Obama should be denied a Senate and House majority in 2010 and another 4 years of presidency in 2012, on the basis of his record in office. I think that will be easier to prove than his birth situation.

  33. I’m sure the US Air Force must have a couple of Douglas Skyraiders still around. Give Pelosi a Spad, let her frickin’ fly around in that.
    Or a broom stick.

  34. The Obama administration, desperately needing a boogeyman to distract attention from their astonishing ineptitude and amateurism, had to choose someone now that Bush isn’t there anymore…
    So now everytime they screw something up, they’ll be all, “Hey, look! Rush Limbaugh!”
    Can’t buy better advertising than that!

  35. We could all see what Obama was during the campaign. Dems know who he is. The entire dem campaign was a fraud from beginning to end.
    There is a reason his background documents are sealed. IF we saw them all we would KNOW who he is and reject him outright. He is the puppet and the Chicago machine is the puppet master. They have their ways and means and that includes ACORN having sway in housing, mortgages and ‘election fraud’. You think they are idle now that the election has been ‘won’. Not a chance. That 4 billion of taxpayer dollars will go a long way toward ensuring the ground game goes to Obama, legal or not. Pubbies better take note of what is going on in the senate race between that idiot Franken and incumbent Coleman. Blueprint for 2010 and how the dems intend to rule forever. IF we let them get away with it.

  36. I forget who the quote is from, but to paraphrase, ‘don’t get into an ongoing public dispute with anyone who purchases ink by the barrel!’
    The modern equivalent would be someone who spends several hours a day, talking to millions of listeners on a mike or website.

  38. “Fred, don’t think that Obama and his team aren’t, now, preparing for the midterm elections.”
    ET, I think you post was a good one. But what really frightens me along those lines is a report that I came across somewhere that said once Obama was finished with his tax rebates for the poor, the population that pays no tax will be near 50%.
    Think about that – half the population (ie majority or close to it) that has not a concern in the world about how much money the govt spends because they don’t pay any of it. If ever there was a recipe for perpetual Democrat misrule, that is it!
    I think the Obama team is indeed very cognizant of future elections. The porkulus is full of measures to increase dependence on the govt and therefore install a permanent majority Democrat voting block. That’s always been the point of “tax & spend” anyway hasn’t it?

  39. mine wasn’t clever…
    I just said tune it to 1190 kex from 12-3.
    I don’t know if they will use it.

  40. RHTT – the “that’s so 1776”, was my line actually – referring specifically to Section 1 Article 2 of the US Constitution. I didn’t say that to denigrate the constitution, but more to point out that IMHO that article was drafted to exclude the British born from holding the office.
    And, in that thread, I believe I pointed out that McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone, which provided its own set of complexities (although not really).
    So, I didn’t think and still don’t think that Obama or McCain’s birth status was really relevant at this point. We’re long past that, there won’t be any do-overs.
    Cheers

  41. Re: “my own view is that the issue of Obama’s birth is not relevant” — I think it is relevant if only because if he is not a natural born U.S. citizen, it would be clear that he had obtained office under fraudulent conditions. (I am assuming he would have known he was in violation of the Constitution.) That’s worthy of impeachment, I would say.

  42. ET wrote, “Right Honourable – my own view is that the issue of Obama’s birth is not relevant. The Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court swore him into office. That, to me, effectively ends the issue.”
    I, like RHTT, disagree. If Obama has become the POTUS under false premises, he unlawfully holds that office. The fact that this issue has not been “transparently”—one of Obama’s favourite adverbs—dealt with is a very serious concern. Obama’s not above the law—or is he?
    In general, I strongly agree with ET’s take on Obama and I’m still surprised that so many writers give him any credit: he was as phony when all this started as he is being exposed as being now. SDA was onto this guy long before he was POTUS. Verdict? Snake oil salesman—then and now.

  43. Anyone remember when Kate useta put up her “Recession Watch” posts with snide comments about anyone who dared to see the recession coming?
    Wotta Nostradamus! 🙂

  44. Lily says, Hello O, Hello, you either have JavaScript turned off or an old version of Adobe’s Flash Player.”
    …-
    “Chas Freeman Withdraws
    BREAKING NEWS: Just as I posted this–literally- the news has come through that Charles Freeman has asked not to be appointed to the post! In other words, our blogs, attacks and opposition has done its job! If not for people like the folks at The Weekly Standard, who uncovered Freeman’s e mail, and journalists like Eli Lake, Martin Peretz, James Kirchick, Reason magazine’s Michael Moynihan and others, this victory could not have taken place. Kudos to all of them, and let us rejoice! ..”
    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2203652/posts
    …-
    “G20 summit: US Treasury department won’t answer their phones, says top UK civil servant
    The Telegraph”
    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2203656/posts

  45. ROFL maz2, the comments are great.
    …DoS (denial of service) attack on the USA Treasury Department.

  46. ET & Lookout
    there is as we post as serving member of the military you is suing for proof of birth, this law suite has more legal standing then the previous ones, in that he (owebama) can not be Commander in Chief if he is not American born, and a military that will not serve would be a huge problem for Owebama

  47. lookout, the reason that I say that Obama’s birthplace is now irrelevant is that using it as a strategy of getting rid of him is, in my view, impossible.
    That is, I doubt if anyone will be able to find his birth certificate. If one is found, it will be held up in court trials as ‘a forgery’ for years.
    If the agenda is to get Obama out, fast, before he destroys America, than, the best way is via the 2010 and 2012 elections. The way to prepare for these is by vast publicity, discussion, debate, criticism, questions..everywhere. Particularly on blogs and talk shows.
    Obama and his team will be, now, preparing for these two election years and will be recruiting voters, will be attracting more people by making them dependent on a Benevolent Obama to provide them with everything.
    So, the Opposition has to be broad, diverse and, for a year, not led by any one person. There should not, at the moment, be a single Republican leader. Instead, opposition to Obama should be expressed by Conservatives, Republicans – of all levels, Independents..and..growing Democrat concern. Don’t focus this opposition within the control, yet, of any one Leader. Instead, make it widespread, diverse and varied.
    Then, in a year, hone it down to a basic Conservative focus (small govt, freedom,low taxes, etc)..and a leader.
    But, the tactic of getting rid of him by finding a document that he wants to keep hidden – won’t work.

  48. As per ET’s argument, it is better to win fully rather than on a technicality

  49. Re using the birth certificate to get rid of Obama, I agree with you, ET: it won’t work. But this issue is important because it’s one more indicator of the big Zero’s wagon with no wheels.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation