Reply With Quote
Pure pap and appeal to emotion. Some things never change.
http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_15581194
Barack Obama ought to be one of the happiest men in America.
In less than two years, he's presided over monumental, historic changes to our health care system and financial industries. He has won a Nobel Peace Prize and already has nominated two like-minded scholars to the U.S. Supreme Court, leaving a lasting imprint on the high court.
Yet, his approval rating (44 percent) dropped to historic lows this past week. The country has been in a funk for the better part of a year and the economy is dangerously close to a double-dip recession.
His own party has needled him for not going far enough or moving fast enough. And Republicans are salivating over the very real possibility of wresting control of at least one house of Congress from Democrats in November.
Jobs have vanished faster than BP's credibility. And the oil leak has been a drain on the national psyche.
Welcome to the summer of malaise.
Welcome back, Carter.
Even the talking heads at MSNBC have compared Obama's sudden lack of leadership, his summer spent adrift, to the uninspiring Jimmy Carter presidency after last month's remarkably lackluster national address about the Gulf oil leak.
President Obama has accomplished quite a bit on the domestic front, but like Carter, the public tide has turned against him and his foreign policy has been, in large part, a complete disappointment.
His health care plan, approved only after the type of backroom, sleazy deal-making he crusaded against during his campaign, does little to bring down exorbitant costs and could bankrupt states once higher Medicaid costs are passed down.
The $1 trillion stimulus provided only a blip of a recovery, while saddling the nation with an unsustainable debt load. And the federal government's reach into business and the financial world, for better or worse, is now deeper than ever.
We endorsed Obama in 2008, believing his plans for the fragile economy and frozen financial markets were superior to John McCain's erratic ideas. But we also hoped he would restore the nation's reputation with the rest of the world. But instead of being vilified, as we were under Bush, the United States is now suddenly bordering on being irrelevant.
Relations with China and Russia have been deteriorating.
China wags its finger at us over our spendthrift ways, and who can blame them for worrying about whether we can ever afford to pay them back?
North Korea sinks a South Korean boat, and the U.S. provides no leadership. Instead, the Obama administration issues what amounts to a tersely worded press release.
Relations with the government we prop up in Afghanistan are, at best, strained.
No U.S. president since Carter has been as crossways with Israel, our one solid Middle East ally.
And on the homefront, unemployment still hovers around 10 percent. Factor in those who have lost hope and have stopped looking, and the jobless rate is in the high teens.
There's also been an intangible, yet inescapable, sense of unease in the country, reminiscent of our late- 1970s malaise. Faith in Obama's "Yes we can" slogan has faded faster than the Obama-Biden stickers still clinging to bumpers.
It's not too late for Obama to turn around his presidency. His party likely will take a beating at the polls this year for its over-reaching congressional agenda, but ideally a more balanced Congress will move the president closer to the political center.
One media outlet asked last week: Can Obama get his groove back?
He must. The nation still needs a unifying leader, one who can lift up all citizens and restore our hope and pride and belief that America's best days not only are ahead, but near.
Pure pap and appeal to emotion. Some things never change.
Tell us again how the media is slanted towards liberalism and why right-wing hit jobs like this bull (repeated 100s of times/week by hate media) have no effect against the tsunami of left-wing media.
Freudian slip?
LOL...
Did he really say that?
Gotta look for a transcript now. Will someone beat me to it?
Why would you think that was a slip? Saying something like "O'Carter" would have to be pretty deliberate.
OMG...
With video of him saying it:
Matthews: Will Democrats 'Run Away From President O-Carter' - I Mean Obama?
So the author believes Obama has to convince us all to believe something which isn't true in order to have a successful presidency.He must. The nation still needs a unifying leader, one who can lift up all citizens and restore our hope and pride and belief that America's best days not only are ahead, but near.
The bummer universe is a bummer.
I thought the author implied (in keeping with the analogy) that we must now look to the GOP, as in 1980, to furnish an ikon of redemptive hope now that "malaise" has been detected.
Last edited by Winehole23; 07-26-2010 at 02:32 PM.
Darrin, true or false.....
the country would currently be in a better economic state with McCain as president rather than Obama.
In terms of bald implausibility, right up there with Armey's "Barney " slip.
Probably about the same becaue McCain is a RINO (Republican in name only). He was pro-anmesty for illegals (before he was against it) and he was pro cap and tax (before he was against it).
McCain as a weak candidate has nothing to do with the ty policies of the Obama regime.
But Barney is a .
That's why O'Carter is better for this nation. His agenda and lack of leadership will propel more conservatives in office this November.
Now that's Hope and Change I can believe in!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!His agenda and lack of leadership will I HOPE propel more conservatives in office this November.
Board Republicans hope things get worse so the numbers in Congress will change in their team's favor.
They actually cheer when the unemployment rate grows.
Looks like the repugs have cheered alot over the decades
Jan 1949 Jan 1953 4.3 2.9 -1.4 Truman Democrat
Jan 1953 Jan 1957 2.9 4.2 +1.3 Eisenhower I Republican
Jan 1957 Jan 1961 4.2 6.6 +2.4 Eisenhower II Republican
Jan 1961 Jan 1965 6.6 4.9 -1.7 JFK/Johnson Democrat
Jan 1965 Jan 1969 4.9 3.4 -1.5 Johnson Democrat
Jan 1969 Jan 1973 3.4 4.9 +1.5 Nixon Republican
Jan 1973 Jan 1977 4.9 7.5 +2.6 Nixon/Ford Republican
Jan 1977 Jan 1981 7.5 7.5 0.0 Carter Democrat
Jan 1981 Jan 1985 7.5 7.3 -0.2 Reagan I Republican
Jan 1985 Jan 1989 7.3 5.4 -1.9 Reagan II Republican
Jan 1989 Jan 1993 5.4 7.3 +1.9 Bush, GHW Republican
Jan 1993 Jan 1997 7.3 5.3 -2.0 Clinton I Democrat
Jan 1997 Jan 2001 5.3 4.2 -1.1 Clinton II Democrat
Jan 2001 Jan 2005 4.2 5.2 +1.0 Bush, GW I Republican
Jan 2005 Aug 2008 5.2 6.1 +0.9 Bush, GW II Republican
true in my case. the worse things get, the more people realize what a mistake they made and how stupid they were.
not that the alternative was any better... two crappy choices. what was the point of even voting?
"Hope and change," but with more traditional iconography (instead of that creepy new age kind). I do wonder how long it will take for the cons utionalist nostalgia to evaporate after a GOP win.
Poll: Public favors Obama’s economic policies over Bush’s by wide margin.
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/07/27/...-policies-win/
Poll: Public favors Obama’s economic policies over Bush’s by wide margin.
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/07/27/...-policies-win/
Wait a minute here:
According to that figure (in total column):
46% favor pursuing tax and massive spending of Obama admin (84% of that being Obamabots)
46% favor either Bush policies or neither
"Wide margin"
Tecnically, Boutons just pointed out that more people favor Obama's policy than Bush's policy by a good margin, which is true. Boutons didn't say the people preferred Obama's policy over ANY policy, just Bush's.Wait a minute here:
According to that figure (in total column):
46% favor pursuing tax and massive spending of Obama admin (84% of that being Obamabots)
46% favor either Bush policies or neither
"Wide margin"
Why didn't they just ask people whether they'd like to be shot in the arm or shot in the leg?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
