January 30, 2010

Barack Obama: Not "quitting" enough!

Now is the time at SDA when we juxtapose!

Carol Platt Liebau (Harvard Law Review), February 2009 - "[Tom Pirelli] did most of the day to day work. Barack Obama was nowhere to be seen. Occasionally he would drop in he would talk to people, and then he'd leave again as though his very arrival had been a benediction in and of itself, but not very much got done."

Byron York (National Examiner), January 2010 - Many observers have remarked that, even when dealing with the most momentous issues facing the country, Obama has seemed oddly removed from the hands-on work of making policy.

Posted by Kate at January 30, 2010 12:11 AM

And Sarah Lee doesn't bake the cakes?


Posted by: syncrodox at January 30, 2010 12:29 AM

"but not very much got done"...say no more Harvard Law Review, say no more.

Posted by: kelly at January 30, 2010 12:31 AM

From the outset I wondered if Owebama was stable enough to be president. Having watched his State of the Union I had to laugh. His style of negotiating is "Obviously you are too stupid to catch my brilliance so I will repeat it more loudly". That inability to understand that sometimes you are wrong is his source of frustration and will most likely cause him to resign in the next year. Undoubtedly he will be looking for something bigger where he can better impose his will on the unwilling.

Posted by: Joe at January 30, 2010 12:38 AM

Oh golly ... this is a surprise to anyone??

Posted by: Aizlynne at January 30, 2010 12:39 AM

What's the idjit in the movie called - Chauncey Gardiner or something similar? Ogabe reminds me of that simpleton.

Posted by: Slim at January 30, 2010 12:49 AM

Hey, if Obama is bored or disinterested or whatever, git me some of that, since he sure kicked ass at the Repub retreat today and left your guys exposed as the clueless nihilistic liars they are. What a bloodbath! :)

Posted by: marquis at January 30, 2010 12:51 AM

"Many observers have remarked that, even when dealing with the most momentous issues facing the country, Obama has seemed oddly removed from the hands-on work of making policy."

That's a good thing...not?

Posted by: Brad at January 30, 2010 12:51 AM

hmm, ya marquis guess I missed that part

Posted by: kelly at January 30, 2010 12:56 AM

All things considered it is likely best if the anointed one takes an extended Hawaii vacation. Like for 3 years.

Posted by: James at January 30, 2010 12:59 AM

got a link there,marquis,or just spouting your "feelings" again? And how come your mommy is letting you stay up so late?
The big Zero doesn't Have to actually do anything,doncha know? He is the LEADER after all.With leaders like that,the US sure doesn't need any foreign enemies.

Posted by: Justthinkin at January 30, 2010 1:16 AM

marquis didn't watch the same session I watched. Obama basically lied through his teeth to deny what is very evident.

Posted by: Joe at January 30, 2010 1:24 AM

Come on, Joe.
Did Obama lie or did the words he used just have a different meaning to him than they did to you?

Posted by: Oz at January 30, 2010 2:44 AM

Even when he was awarded the NPP, his wife Michelle was quoted as saying it would be great if he'd actually done something...

Posted by: Skip at January 30, 2010 8:19 AM

Obama is ignorant of history, of economics, of fiscal theory - and has no ability to intellectually explore and analyze any issue.

His focus is always and only - psychological. That is, his focus is on his personal interaction with others, with the agenda of controlling how they react to him. This personal interaction is achieved via misinformation, or lying; emotional manipulation and accusations of bias if you disagree with him.

All three tactics were in evidence at his meeting with the Republicans. His evasions and outright lies were stunning.

For example, when he was challenged that he did not allow Republican input to the health debate, his response was 'I've read your submissions'. However, that is an evasion; reading is not equivalent to debating the Republican advice, and there was no indication that their papers were even considered and he didn't state the reasons why their advice was rejected. Such an egocentric response was both misinformation and manipulation. He was daring them to challenge him and ask why he didn't consider the advice. The Republicans were too 'nice' to do so.

He did the same with other issues. He ignored the reality of closed door sessions on health care, he totally ignored the reality of massive bribes to various state senators in return for their votes, ignored the unfairness of the union exemptions from the tax etc..

And pretended that his outline was beyond dispute; that is, he was brazenly manipulative, using the authority of his office to prevent open rejection of his fictional narrative.

He declared he welcomed debate and questions, ignoring that he has openly rejected both, insisting that His Bills be passed without debate or even reading and that the 'time has come' to cease questions.

Declared that his stimulus had no earmarks when it was filled with them, trivialized the deficit, and evaded answers.

Posted by: ET at January 30, 2010 8:50 AM

The UN should be bambam's gig. Self-importance, ineffective and incompetent. Steal as much as you like and it is ok. With any luck the US electorate will give him the opportunity to apply for a job.

Posted by: Speedy at January 30, 2010 10:32 AM

Enjoyed Jonas' column today. Great take on the State of the Union address.


The host pours an inch of Scotch in a glass, neat. He looks puzzled. “Obama really didn’t say much,” he offers, “for a guy who spoke for about 70 minutes.”

“Seventy-five, but who is counting,” says the Dane. “He may have said next to nothing, but God, he said it well. He looked good saying it, too.”

This gets me going. I pull out all the stops. “If you can look good saying what President Obama said,” I say, “you can look good saying anything.


Posted by: gellen at January 30, 2010 10:39 AM

But throughout his life, his reaction to frustration has been to look for a bigger job. What does he do now?

A lot of people on the left have claimed for a long time that is no god. Well, that means there is a still a potential gig for the Big Zero.

Meanwhile, there is a great song from the 70s called "Where do we go from here" ... Have a listen, it's quite an American lament.

Dedicated to the fool on the Hill.

Posted by: Abe Froman at January 30, 2010 10:44 AM

What I find extremely funny is that his 'agenda' is purely in his head. It doesn't translate into real action or legislation. Yet he is so convinced of its veracity he will just say the same nonsense over and over again because he believes that those who don't see or agree with his agenda are stupid.
What is even more disturbing is I am convinced he really doesn't have a plan of action but rather a bunch of disjointed, dispirit 'concepts' that have no touchstones in reality floating around in his head.

Posted by: Joe at January 30, 2010 11:50 AM

He's a one trick pony.

The trick is appearing as something new and full of potential.

He's done it for Harvard admissions, for the Chicago political machine, and for the national electorate.

It's worked very well, but it has always been just a matter of time before the bluff would be called.

Posted by: pok at January 30, 2010 12:17 PM

Obama has seemed oddly removed from the hands-on work of making policy.

It would be hard to come to that conclusion from his deft handling of the truth/reality challenged Republican House caucus the other day.

Posted by: phil at January 30, 2010 2:04 PM

and yet pillboy, teddy kennedy's senate seat in mASSachusetts went to an evile republican. and that was with barry flying in personally to bless the democRat candidate.

methinks thou dost grasp at straw men, pilly.

Posted by: The Phantom at January 30, 2010 2:30 PM

Please Phil, what does a leftard know of truth, or even recognise it, if it were standing naked in front of him?

Posted by: Skip at January 30, 2010 2:44 PM

"but not very much got done"...
How amusing to see the situaton expressed in the passive voice. LOL.
BTW, he wasn't a professor at Harvard was he? He was a "senior lecturer".

Along these lines I recently and tentatively wondered if there might not be a touch of autism here. This manchild does not CONNECT.

Being the resident Marxism bore, an update:
Steve Hayes of the Weekly Standard has stated that the most egregious lie in the SOTU was his claim that he is not an ideologue. AGREED. The great Caroline Glick has recently argued that he is an ideologue. Her argument, simplified, is that unlike Clinton and Bush, who, after losses in Congress, veered right and left respectively, Obama is doubling down on this hard left marxist agenda. AGREED.

PLUS, gasp!: in his recent scold of Repub members, he said something along the lines of "heh, some of you guys are suggesting that this Health plan is some kind of Bolshevik plan ...." bringing to mind Willie Shakespeare's famous phrase, "the lady doth protest too much." I find this bogus disclaimer one of the most shocking things to come out of this liar's mouth.

Posted by: Me No Dhimmi at January 30, 2010 3:36 PM

Yes, Obama evaded answers to the Republicans at their meeting - evading why health care debates did not involve Republicans, evading why he's using taxpayer money to bribe states to go along with his health care plan, why he's bribed the unions to go along, ignoring that he rejects debate, that he insists on Congress passing bills without reading them...The Republicans gave Obama an easy time and didn't press him with these evasions. But Obama is incapable of policy analysis and development, incapable of cause and effect thinking.

He's a simple manipulator and now that he has his hands on the taxpayers' money, he uses it for bribes. That's what the pork-filled stimulus was all about (and he denied 'earmarks' exist in his talk with the Republicans!)...and now...

Obama is offering 200 million to a city in the US that will hold the 9/11 trials. That's taxpayer money. That won't develop infrastructural jobs. But since he and Hodder deny the reality of terrorism and won't try these people in a military court, and insist on a civilian trial..Obamam is using taxpayer money to achieve this agenda.

And why is he selling arms to Taiwan? What's he trying to do - create tensions in the East? Or is he, as he did with his SOTU endless speech, talking to his leftist base and trying to appease them?

Obama is not a leader but a manipulative salesman of a radical socialist statist agenda.

Posted by: ET at January 30, 2010 3:39 PM

ET sayeth: "Obama is not a leader but a manipulative salesman of a radical socialist statist agenda."

Verily thou speakest sooth, fair one.

Indeed one might ask, with The One having given 400+ speeches in the last 365 or so days, when did he have five minutes to give a thought to what he was speechifying about?

He doesn't write 'em, he just reads 'em.

Posted by: The Phantom at January 30, 2010 4:14 PM

me no dhimmi - it's me again, me again - the resident sceptic!

YES - Obama is selling a marxist ideology, but NO, he's not a marxist idealogue. That takes a certain number of years of study, reading, analysis - and Obama is intellectually shallow, ill read, ignorant and lazy. AND, he's cognitively incapable of logical thinking, i.e., thinking through a cause and effect analysis.

Therefore, he, himself (I claim) is not an ideologue of anything. He's a psychological entity, not an intellectual entity. And his 'shtick' is to manipulate people so that he feels in control of them. He gave such a performance at the Republican meeting the other day. It was pure misinformation, aka lying, evasion, manipulation, using his status as president manipulate them...into being in 'his' control.

BUT he's embedded with the radical socialists whose agenda is to insert a statist system in the US - because such a statism sets him up as an elite power. And that's what he's after. Power, the thrill and psychological need to control others. There's nothing more to Obama than this; that need to control others. He hasn't a thought in his twinkling little brain other than this agenda.

Posted by: ET at January 30, 2010 4:27 PM

Obama is right on track for his agenda. He has trashed the elctoral process, bringing in money from all over the world, unchecked and unregulated, yet he accuses the Supremes of ruling in a way to 'allow' foreign investment directly from corporations. Not only did Obama get elected by those exact foreigners he had Soros help when he caused a run on Wall St. This , more than anything else sealed the election for Obama. Let's not be deceived by this bait and switch. Obama pretends to target and interfere in Banks and bailouts and bonus money for the banks and Wall St. Yet his administration, as in the lobbyists he decries, is full of those alumni from Goldman Sacs.
He has gathered wealth into his control. VERY little has trickled out. It is about the accumulation of wealth, not the re-distribution. The tearing down and demeaning of any entity or company or political party that crosses him until he has total control of the reins of the country will continue unabated. The SOTU was one of the most dishonest and underhanded ever delivered by a US president. They intend to have the money , all of it in their control. Hence the health bill is designed as it is and they will move heaven and earth to pass it. Come Hell or High Water and maybe both.
The meeting with the republicans was no such thing. He went there to lay down the law. He shook his head, he interrupted and he said 'shhh' more than once. A disgraceful display from a president, but deliberate. He intended to tell them how it is and how they can do nothing about it all the while touting that he wants to hear other ideas. Everythin he says is a lie deliberately said and done to gather power and tear down the constitution and the institutions of the US. He has already taken control of the Student loan program. And has said that their loans will be forgiven over 10 years IF they dedicated themselves to 'community service'.
That now would make graduates slaves to Michelle's Army, not free for ten years to live their own lives and go their own way in freedom.
As was demonstrated by the comments from the Harvard Law Review. Obama is the front man. The man who looks good but has nothing in that suit or that brain that comes close to understanding the United States or her people. Where did he come from , indeed!

Posted by: Snowbunnie at January 30, 2010 4:54 PM

A "good thing", on the face of it --- were it not that his proxies, Reid and Pelosi, are also batshit power-hungry leftists. What all three want is a few of those opening wedges, like HC and C & T, to overturn and (nearly) crash the economy so they can have a free hand. The GM takeover and overriding of legal obligations to Chrysler bond-holders were major wins for them, and they're STILL determined to get the other prybars stuck in so they can begin the Great Tipping.

Back to Rex; his untouchable status as hyper-literate sardonic curmudgeon allows him to speak truth to power in a way no one else at CBC dare contemplate, even were they so inclined. I think part of Mansbridge's shock was sheer awe at Rex's courage.

Posted by: Brian H at January 30, 2010 5:59 PM

snowbunnie - but Obama's attacks and lies in his SOTU speech were followed by his further lies in his meeting with the Republicans.

There, he insisted that he was 'all in favour' of opposition, of dissent and dialogue. What nonsense. At any hint of criticism, he bristles like a porcupine. He's gone after Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck and tried to shut up FOX news.

He's disparaged and smeared the Tea Party demonstrations. He rejected the open Town Halls (his are carefully staged and screened). He's ranted that 'the time for talk is over' and insisted that Congress pass His bills...without reading them, without debating them.

So, his 'new talk' about his openess to criticism and debate is sheer vote-buying manipulation. He's a pathological liar; he says what he thinks his audience of the moment wants to hear, for his agenda is singular; to control them.

Posted by: ET at January 30, 2010 6:07 PM

Apparently he may have a career in basketball broadcasting; he was doing a little of that on Saturday, and said he may be looking for work in three or seven years.

I was surprised he mentioned three, but there you have it.

Posted by: Peter O'Donnell at January 31, 2010 2:18 AM

republican house. which one is that? -democrats.
also democrats.

whitehouse -democrats.

so far no demos and mostly bureaucrats.

Posted by: cal2 at January 31, 2010 10:42 PM