- Joined
- May 7, 2010
- Messages
- 5,095
- Reaction score
- 1,544
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
After a suffering a "shellacking" in the midterm elections, President Obama acknowledges what many have seen as his chief weakness - failing to sell the importance of several legislative milestones to the American people.
"I think that's a fair argument. I think that, over the course of two years we were so busy and so focused on getting a bunch of stuff done that, we stopped paying attention to the fact that leadership isn't just legislation. That it's a matter of persuading people. And giving them confidence and bringing them together. And setting a tone," Mr. Obama told 60 Minutes' Steve Kroft in an exclusive interview set to air Sunday. (See clip below)
'It's not our policies, it's the failure of the people to understand our policies'
LOL completely assbackwards."I think that's a fair argument. I think that, over the course of two years we were so busy and so focused on getting a bunch of stuff done that, we stopped paying attention to the fact that leadership isn't just legislation. That it's a matter of persuading people."
God. He thinks it's his failure to sell his vision??? No matter how he dressed up that pig, no sale to a vast majority of the American people. He still doesn't get it.
People who claim Obama is "evil" or "anti-American" or "retarded" are just as fanatic as those liberals who claimed that GWB was a terrorist and a sociopath when he was in office. Both presidents believed in what they were doing and believed it was best for the country at the time. Both presidents however, were wrong. Bush though people wanted to be protected from overseas Islamic extremist at all cost, even if that meant preemptive wars based on thin pretenses, but he didn't realize that a lot of liberal minded people didn't want it. Obama thought that people wanted the removal of anti-consumer/pro-business policies in the credit card industries, health industries, and mortgage loan industries, but he didn't realize that a lot of old-school, traditional conservatives who are happy with their health plans don't want that.
sounds about right to me.
Its more the case that he went to war, knowing that the liberals would not like it, because it was the right thing to do.I think that Bush did realize that a lot of liberal-minded people didn't want to go to war, he just didn't care because those folks weren't going to vote for him no matter what.
People who claim Obama is "evil" or "anit-American" or "retarded" are just as fanatic as those liberals who claimed that GWB was a terrorist and a sociopath when he was in office. Both presidents believed in what they were doing and believed it was best for the country at the time. Both presidents however, were wrong. Bush though people wanted to be protected from overseas Islamic extremist at all cost, even if that meant preemptive wars based on thin pretenses, but he didn't realize that a lot of liberal minded people didn't want it. Obama thought that people wanted the removal of anti-consumer/pro-business policies in the credit card industries, health industries, and mortgage loan industries, but he didn't realize that a lot of old-school, traditional conservatives who are happy with their health plans don't want that.
I totally agree about people on either side needing to demonize someone just because they don't reach the same conclusions. It's childish.
As Lincoln said, "you can please some of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time but you can't please all of the people all of the time." There are some people who will not like anything that Bush did just because he is a Republican. There are some people who will dislike everything that Obama has done or will do simply because he is a Democrat.
I think that Bush did realize that a lot of liberal-minded people didn't want to go to war, he just didn't care because those folks weren't going to vote for him no matter what. Also, Bush didn't go into Iraq because of Islamic terrorism. He went into Iraq because of Saudi oil. It was clear that maintenance of US forces in Saudi Arabia was not viable (infidels in the sacred land) as it was causing too much trouble for the Saudi government. The troops were in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait in order to prevent Hussein from invading again. Next time, he would not bother with Kuwait but would go directly for the mother load. So, to protect Saudi oil from falling into Hussein's hands, Hussein had to go. Justifications followed. I wonder if he could have gotten the support of the public if he had explained this.
I don't think that lumping anti-consumer/pro-business credit card and mortgage loan are in the same category as health care. I don't think that keeping companies from screwing consumers is a bad thing and I don't think that most people would disagree. I also think those things didn't play much of a role in the election, which is a mistake by the Democrats. They could have touted how the Republicans opposed reining in corporate abuse. Certainly, health care was a big thing but I don't know how big of a negative it really was to the voters (only 19% said it was an issue and the responders didn't indicate if they are in favor of the changes or against). This was probably a lot more important to the Republican leadership than to the voters. The polls say that this was primarily a vote on the economy. The economy sucks so the party "in power" gets punished. However, now that the Republicans are in power in the House, they will claim that the vote was a mandate on all of the crap they talked about when it was largely just "fix the fricking economy."
Its more the case that he went to war, knowing that the liberals would not like it, because it was the right thing to do.
If somone opposes the right thing, then they are, by definition, wrong.
First I want to apologize to some of the low life, brain dead Liberals I have attacked in the past for being stupid because I was wrong and there are a few of them who have caught on to Obama's fraud and lack of intelligence.
Leadership is having the right ideas and being able to convey them in such a way that others understand them and want to get behind them and make them reality.
Obama blew the greatest opportunity ever given to any one in the history of man.
I am one of those who knew Obama was an Anti-American from the start, but millions believed his lies, and then he blew it by trying to put his Socialism/Marxism plans and agenda in place, and more and more real Americans figured it out.
Obama with any luck will be a one term wonder but unless he learns from his massive mistakes he will be pointed out in history form now on as not only the worst ever to hold the office but the first ever Anti-American to ever hold the office.
You can say what you want about President George W. Bush being a bad guy or idiot t or what ever, but anyone with half a brain can see that Obama has been misrepresented by his disciples as a genius when he's in fact borderline retarded.
You really screwed the pooch on that quote. He said:
"You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time."
People who claim Obama is "evil" or "anit-American" or "retarded" are just as fanatic as those liberals who claimed that GWB was a terrorist and a sociopath when he was in office. Both presidents believed in what they were doing and believed it was best for the country at the time. Both presidents however, were wrong. Bush though people wanted to be protected from overseas Islamic extremist at all cost, even if that meant preemptive wars based on thin pretenses, but he didn't realize that a lot of liberal minded people didn't want it. Obama thought that people wanted the removal of anti-consumer/pro-business policies in the credit card industries, health industries, and mortgage loan industries, but he didn't realize that a lot of old-school, traditional conservatives who are happy with their health plans don't want that.
The war? Given the information at the time and the history of the issue, military action was the right course of action.So, why was it "right"?
The war? Given the information at the time and the history of the issue, military action was the right course of action.
Its more the case that he went to war, knowing that the liberals would not like it, because it was the right thing to do.
If somone opposes the right thing, then they are, by definition, wrong.
So, if he isn't your garden variety dumbass, he must be sabotaging the country on purpose. Right?
Everything he's done has been totally counter-productive. Either he's doing it intentionally, or he's just a stupid mother ****er.
What is amazing is that there is never any intelligent response to my posts about Obama because there is no argument that can be made in favor of a fool.
That doesnt invalidate my premise at all.What is wrong with your premise is that "right" is relative and not absolute.
That doesnt invalidate my premise at all.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?