A community of 30,000 US Transcriptionist serving Medical Transcription Industry
Where's Waldo/Obama?
Posted: Mar 16, 2011
So, the good news is that ESPN just aired Obama's brackets for the NCAA tournament!! I feel so much better now that I know what his picks are going to be!!
They gave him the Nobel Peace Prize, right? Hope and Change?? Is this really happening or did I enter some alternate universe? We'll get to those other pesky problems later. In the meantime, party on, prez!
Obama the invisible
Last Updated: 10:14 AM, March 16, 2011
Posted: 11:48 PM, March 15, 2011
Where is the president? The world is beset. Moammar Khadafy is moving relentlessly to crush the Libyan revolt that once promised the overthrow of one of the world's most despicable regimes.
So where is the president?
Japan may be on the verge of a disaster that dwarfs any we have yet seen. A self-governing nation like the United States needs its leader to take full measure of his position at times of crises when the path forward is no longer clear.
This is not a time for leadership; this is the time for leadership.
So where is Barack Obama?
The moment demands that he rise to the challenge of showing America and the world that he is taking the reins. How leaders act in times of unanticipated crisis, in which they do not have a formulated game plan and must instead navigate in treacherous waters, defines them.
Obama is defining himself in a way that will destroy him.
It is not merely that he isn't rising to the challenge. He is avoiding the challenge. He is Bartleby the President. He would prefer not to.
He has access to a microphone 24 hours a day, seven days a week. If he tells the broadcast networks in the middle of the day that he has a major address to deliver on an unprecedented world situation, they will cancel their programming for him.
And yet, since Friday and a press conference in which he managed to leave the American position on Libya more muddled than it was before, we have not heard his voice. Except in a radio address -- he talked about education legislation.
And he appeared at a fund-raiser in DC. And sat down with ESPN to reveal his NCAA picks.
He cannot go on like this. Niall Ferguson, the very pessimis tic economic his torian, wrote the other day that the best we can now hope for is that Obama leaves the country in the same kind of shape that Jimmy Carter left it in.
That doesn't do Obama justice. Despite how disastrously he has handled the crises of the past two months, he can still turn his presidency around on a dime.
For Obama to save himself, he should be thinking about the example of an unlikely Republican predecessor: Richard Nixon.
The multifarious crises the president now faces are eerily similar to the kinds of calamities that greeted Richard Nixon in his first term from 1969-1972. Then, as now, the world was on fire. Wars erupted between China and the Soviet Union, India and Pakistan, even El Salvador and Honduras.
Jordan was nearly taken over from within by the Palestine Liberation Organization. There were humanitarian disasters in Biafra (the result of civil war), Bangladesh (due to flooding) and Nicaragua (deadly earthquake).
There was more, much more -- including a war he inherited in Vietnam, just as Obama has the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. You get the point.
Nixon in 1968, unlike Obama 2008, was elected as a minority president with only 43 percent of the vote. Yet, in 1972, he won what, in some measures, was the most lopsided election in American history with 61 percent.
Nixon achieved it, in large measure, because he appeared to be a serious man grappling in deadly earnest with the serious problems presented to him by a world careening out of control.
He demonstrated high competency when it came to matters on the world stage. He and his team (primarily Henry Kissinger) developed coherent policies and strategies for coping with the world. There was no question, to friend or foe, that he was fully engaged, paying attention, deeply involved.
Nixon was an awful president in many ways, including in some of his foreign-policy choices. But he left no doubt that foreign policy and America's leadership in the world outside its borders was of paramount importance to him.
All this had the effect of elevating Nixon during his time in office, so that when it came to running against George McGovern in 1972, Nixon seemed like a Titan and McGovern a pipsqueak.
How Nixon conducted himself in office in times of crises made possible his triumphant re-election. Right now, how Obama is conducting himself in a time of crisis is having the opposite effect.
He began his presidency as a potential colossus -- but if he doesn't change, he will finish it as a pipsqueak. Pipsqueaks don't win second terms.
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/obama_the_invisible_Ass40MBstf15MAr9DYAORK
;
lol....I almost feel sorry for him. He PO'ed all - the flyover folks....
[ In Reply To ..]the far left thinks he's a wimp and a wussy...middle of the road Democrats don't even want in the same photo op with him...how the mighty have fallen. I think the powers to be in the DNC have given up on him...I don't think THEY think he is re-electable. We'll know how displeased Mr. Soros is in whether he does or doesn't run. I kind of look for a "I will not be seeking a second term so that I can return to Chicago and give my family more time yada yada...feel I can be more effective in the private sector " speech. We'll see.
Wishful thinking cannot change the fact that - sm
[ In Reply To ..]the GOP cannot float a single candidate even come close to presenting an effective challenge. Don't take my word for it. Many seen as possible contenders have said as much in their haste to run as far away from that nomination as they can get.
Oh, I think you are so very wrong....because - the people responsible
[ In Reply To ..]for the midterms shellacking are not any more willing to reward continued bad behavior with another 4 years leeway to be shafted, thank you very much. The Republicans will run someone, and that someone will at least provide the CHANCE that things will change, and keeping Obama means more of the SAME. Nooooo thank you.
Go ahead with YOUR wishful thinking if you like....exactly the kind of thinking that resulted in the shellacking. ;-)
Things have certainly not changed for the better after that "shellacking" - nm
[ In Reply To ..]nm
That's because of Pelosi and Reid. Especially Reid. - Backwards Typist
[ In Reply To ..]He should have been a football player or hockey player. He knows how to block pretty good. LOL
Until Reid is gone, as well as a few others, things won't change.
There's always some excuse why they can't do what they were elected to do - It is always the fault of someone else
[ In Reply To ..]I think the problem is that the goals were unrealistic among many other reasons, and no fault of anyone but those "shellackers" themselves.
Hey....we stopped you from ramming anymore - unwanted programs down our throats
[ In Reply To ..]yay, Team Shellackers!
Unrealistic goals...like stop ADDING to the debt and cutting spending and acting like responsible adults...well you are probably right, it does seem to be beyond the power of Democrats to even think about.
Pride goeth before a fall, and they are about to take another big topple if they don't wise up.
I think you may be a little too emotional for an actual discussion - nm
[ In Reply To ..]nm
What discussion? Nothing to discuss. - I didn't like having Obamacare
[ In Reply To ..]jammed down my throat. The midterms prevented that from happening again by removing the Dem majority. If there is something in that you would like to discuss, have at it.
What about Bushcare? It was barely in - the news
[ In Reply To ..]and added a huge amount to the deficit.
Please elaborate. Bushcare? - nm
[ In Reply To ..]nm
You're kidding, right? - No?
[ In Reply To ..].
No, I'm not kidding. Please elaborate. - thanks. nm
[ In Reply To ..]nm
Well....please define Bushcare, how it was - barely in the news and
[ In Reply To ..]how it added to the deficit. Support your post with links...elaborate please. I am unfamiliar with "bushcare." Google search yields nothing but a group dedicated to caring for and saving the "bush" in Australia.
Thanks so much.
whitehouse.gov is the best source - for Bush's Health Care
[ In Reply To ..]The costliest part of Bush II's law is the expansion of Medicare Advantage - a private Medicare plan - heavily subsidizedd (that means by taxpayers), which promised higher quality of care (but didn't) and was very confusing for customers (along with the Medicare D that was part of the Med. Mod. Act.
Privatization was Bush's thing, selling it as freedom of choice, tax savings. Yet those who could not afford insurance in the first place couldn't afford it after this act.
ok...i can't find the figures on line for what this - supposedly cost. Can you
[ In Reply To ..]provide links?
Bush Medicare-prescription-privatization - Passed on fuzzy math
[ In Reply To ..]http://www.articles.cnn.com/2003-12-08/politics/elec04.medicare_1_prescription-drug-private-insurers-medicare
ramming down our throats - ...there it is again
[ In Reply To ..]What's the deal with that? Ramming, throat, etc. I can't help but wonder if it is some kind of Freudian reference.
Why do I keep hearing this inane, repeated refrain? It's so bizarre.
We do have a house and senate, after all.
Oh come on....he was driving the train and - Dems had the majority
[ In Reply To ..]and shoved Obamacare through in spite of the country making it known to their representatives that they did not want it...it WAS to be his "signature" piece of legislation and they were going to ram it through come he** or high water, and they did. The Dems forged ahead anyway (yes, shoved it down our throats...and if you see something Freudian in that the problem lies with you)....and the fact that most of the country WAS against it played out in the midterms...starting with a Republican in Ted Kennedy's seat and a shellacking the likes of which has not been seen for several years.
Nice try at deflection...but the fact remains...the piece of legislation he wanted to pass so he could run on it in 2012 backfired soooo badly....
responsible adults... - sm
[ In Reply To ..]Obama inherited the aftermath of the irresponsible, childlike policies of the former administration.
Need I remind you that Bush's war was the only war in history where the country's coffers - already in a state of deficit - were opened wide in order to finance the actions in Iraq and Afghanistan??
Historically, the big adults who want to wage wars recognize that these actions have to be financed somehow.
Bush looted OUR national resources without a thought as to how we would recover - but that's okay, since his term was over by then, right?
So we go from Obama being an absent leader to it's Bush's fault - that's brilliant!/nm
[ In Reply To ..]nm/
earth to poster - sm
[ In Reply To ..]If you want to talk about absent leaders, let's remember that GW Bush took more vacation time ANY president in history.
My post was directed at the following remark: "Unrealistic goals...like stop ADDING to the debt and cutting spending and acting like responsible adults."
Did you have anything intelligent to offer as a rebuttal?
I'll try my bestest - anon
[ In Reply To ..]I'll try to offer something intelligent but I'm not sure I'll be successful because I'm not from this planet and I'm certainly not as smart as you.
So what? We're talking about Obama being an absent leader while the world is on fire. I could care less about the number of vacations Bush took. Don't assume that I will defend Bush if I criticize Obama. I have my own set of criticisms about Bush. That being said, why the need to throw Bush comparisons with Obama all the time? He should be able to stand on his own and take his own criticism without the answer being, "Well, Bush did (fill in the blank)." It's really getting old.
I don't think President Obama is on vacation. I just saw him speak from the White House - sm
[ In Reply To ..]Presidents make travel plans and arrangements to meet other leaders months ahead. The usually don't cancel those plans, although they do work on all sorts of things while they are away from the White House. Remember Camp David, the Western White House, etc.
Almost every president ends up with white hair at the end of their term(s). They don't keep regular office hours and work while they are on vacation.
I did think Bush took too many vacations, but I will admit that the stress of that job probably makes getting away a necessity, even if you are just doing the work from a different location for a change. There is also an office in Air Force I. They have telephones too.
Doesn't matter if he is gone or not if the - Republicans get the majority
[ In Reply To ..]in the senate next round. Then it doesn't matter if Obama DOES stay in though I think the chances of that are slim to none.
By the looks of their current union debaucle, that would be - a very, very, VERY big IF
[ In Reply To ..]not soon to be forgotten.
The "union debacle" as you call it...did not - affect the people who were
[ In Reply To ..]the biggest part of the midterm Dem losses. Those people know that unions and Dems are joined at the hip...so that IF is not nearly as big as you would like it to be.
Oh yes they have. The Democrats have not been - able to shove another
[ In Reply To ..]program like Obamacare down our throats whether we liked it or not...I say that is most certainly for the better!
One thing that has NOT changed for the better for sure is that Democrats did not get the message. They still don't.
One thing for certain, if this had been a Presidential election year, I don'tknow who would be in the white house right now but I can guarantee it wouldn't be Barack Obama. And if the Democrats' attitudes don't change between now and 2012, it will be a cake walk for whoever the Republicans run.
Democrats did not expect the shellacking they got then...and they probably won't expect the next one.
The handwriting was on the wall when Massachuetts put a Republican in Ted Kennedy's seat.
I would vote for Obama. - nm
[ In Reply To ..]nm
Of course you would, and you would lose.... - just like you did at midterms.
[ In Reply To ..]that's just the way it is now.
So which GOP is brave enough to take him on? - Did I miss something?
[ In Reply To ..]nm
It is not primary season yet. You haven't - missed anything. I am
[ In Reply To ..]not 100% convinced he is going to run for a second term anyway. The far left has been throwing him under the bus as a wimp and a wussy; the middle-of-the-road Democrats are leaning away from him too because they would like NOT to lose their jobs in 2012...so it may be a nonissue. Maybe Republicans will be running against Hillary again...or maybe ol' Joe will run...or another Soros shill...who knows. It is a "developing" story. But, as I have said before....ANYTHING is better than the spend-crazy Democrats, Obama in particular. If Obama does run, I will vote for whoever is on the ticket with him just to get him OUT of the White House...because I KNOW what he is and what he wants and what he will do if he stays in...and I am ready for some CHANGE I CAN BELIEVE IN. ;-)
It is past the time when most candidates have announced - I have also been curious why they have not
[ In Reply To ..]I don't know that it's important, but it is interesting.
I think there are a few already who have exploratory - committees...as to
[ In Reply To ..]formal announcements, I think it will be closer to summer and campaigning in earnest then. I don't think there is a real sense of urgency considering the political climate right now and the opinion that ANYBODY would beat who we have.
Another shove down our throat remark! - seek help
[ In Reply To ..]
Ignore it if you don't like it or --- seek help! - nm
[ In Reply To ..]nm
That's impressive that you are able to make those predictions! - I admit I am not that smart
[ In Reply To ..]You've got me beat. I had no idea that the results of the next election were that predictable. Learning something every day.
I bet you didn't think the midterms would turn - out like they did, either? nm
[ In Reply To ..]nm
Exactly as predicted. Sheeple do - the same things over
[ In Reply To ..]and over.
Kinda silly post, doncha think? If they - were sheeple the Dems
[ In Reply To ..]never would have gotten in in the first place. The sheeple still voted for the Dems...just not enough sheeple left to keep them in. They woke the sleeping giant...good luck getting the giant back to sleep again...lol.
The people that did the shellacking - believe that changing
[ In Reply To ..]parties will change things. They believe a president can create jobs. They know little of the massive tax, mortgage and securities fraud that is going unpunished which is the root of why there are no jobs, and whose fault lies with the Fed, which has more power than the president.
I certainly don't agree with your assessment - sm
[ In Reply To ..]I have no political heroes, but I don't see any change, good or bad, in my own thoughts about President Obama. He does some things well and I disagree with him on others. I like that he has not charged in when emotions were high to bomb Libya, for example, which is what is necessary in order to have a No Fly Zone. I'm not ready to make a lifelong commitment to defending people who have yet to decide who they are and what they intend to do if they take over the country. That is really not our business. I like the fact that President Obama gives thought to all of the facts before going out with a battle cry. We've seen that before and it wasn't effective. We're still paying for the slogan of the week mentality. Bin Laden was supposedly going to be defeated. He wasn't. I very much like the style of not so much talk and action only after carefully considering the consequences thereof.
Agreed. - Something else I like is
[ In Reply To ..]that you got no back talk on these points. Good job.
I also read where he was golfing again on Sunday - Backwards Typist
[ In Reply To ..]instead of leading the nation to help Japan.
Even some dems are getting pi$$ed at him because he's not being a leader. He seems to run away from challenges or "leave it in the hands of Congress." That's not being very responsible. After 3 years, you would think he would learn something instead of just holding press conferences and being in his own little world.
Oh yeah, I also heard, but can't verify it, that he said it would be easier to be the President of China, than the USA.
Now he's on his way to South America to talk about 'our' interests in better trade with those countries. How much you wanna bet it's about the oil well he's invested our money in via George Soros.
If this would have been Bush, he would have been thrashed soundly by MSM, but nary a peep is being heard.
When will he start staying put and doing what a president is supposed to do? He's still playing community organizer.
Look at the words you used, which really take away from the credibility of your message - in my opinion
[ In Reply To ..]"I also heard, but can't verify it"---well we can take that one to the bank, can't we?!
"How much you wanna bet" and "the oil well he's invested..." emotional reaction, but not very factual
"When will he start staying put"---so you can attack him for hiding out in the Whitehouse?
"doing what a president is supposed to do?"---what is that? Are you angry with him because he hasn't started any wars lately?
"Even some dems are" (really? and some are not, just as things usually work. Nothing is 100%.)
"He seems to run away" (seems to?---that's a strong statement)
"you would think he would learn something" --- overstatement with no substance
"just holding press conferences and being in his own little world." ---overstatement with no substance
Ah, I don't see you defending him, just pointing to - Backwards Typist
[ In Reply To ..]to my post and picking it apart. FYI:
"I also heard, but can't verify it"---well we can take that one to the bank, can't we?! Not yet. I've been looking, but of course, I won't post unless it's in black and white in a reliable source.
"How much you wanna bet" and "the oil well he's invested..." emotional reaction, but not very factual: So, why is he going to SA? To further trade and we all know he gave Brazil a few billion to drill for oil.
"When will he start staying put"---so you can attack him for hiding out in the Whitehouse? Nope. I would love to see him stay in the White House and DO something constructive.
"doing what a president is supposed to do?"---what is that? Are you angry with him because he hasn't started any wars lately? That's not a president's job. It's to keep the country going. Aren't YOU angry because he's not following up on his promises? I am.
"Even some dems are" (really? and some are not, just as things usually work. Nothing is 100%.) Yes. Read some of the papers on line. They are getting very uneasy with him.
"He seems to run away" (seems to?---that's a strong statement) It was meant to be a strong statement. He does seem to run away from problems.
"you would think he would learn something" --- overstatement with no substance. As does your reply to my post.
"just holding press conferences and being in his own little world." ---overstatement with no substance. This is MY opinion. Don't like it? Too bad. It bothers you when someone disagrees with you. Hate to tell you this, but people have opinions different than yours.
I'm done with this now. Nothing else you care to post against my opinion will not get another response from me.
"Seems to run away" LOL - Just kidding. Could not resist.
[ In Reply To ..]It was just too good to resist.
reminded me of "Monty Python and Holy Grail" - run awayyyyy!
[ In Reply To ..]Would it help to confuse it if we run away more?
Breaking apart Backward's post like that was rude and uncalled for. It also didn't make too much sense.
Picking apart her post like that seems to be an overstatement - with no substance/nm
[ In Reply To ..]/nm
One cannot debate small-minded remarks; integrity of information invites debate... - specious remarks do not
[ In Reply To ..]If one wants to post remarks on a political forum, one has to expect intelligent analysis.
Intelligent analysis is not "picking apart".
And the condescending goes onnn...and onnnn... - and onnnn...I can feel
[ In Reply To ..]the smugness from here. Ick.
good analysis - nm
[ In Reply To ..]
to Backwards - iceT
[ In Reply To ..]I think you were looking for this:
Obama Seeks a Course of Pragmatism in the Middle East
By MARK LANDLER and HELENE COOPER
WASHINGTON — In the Middle East crisis, as on other issues, there are two Barack Obamas: the transformative historical figure and the pragmatic American president. Three months after a Tunisian fruit vendor set himself aflame and ignited a political firestorm across the Arab world, the president is trumping the trailblazer.
With the spread of antigovernment protests from North Africa to the strategic, oil-rich Persian Gulf, President Obama has adopted a policy of restraint. He has concluded that his administration must shape its response country by country, aides say, recognizing a stark reality that American national security interests weigh as heavily as idealistic impulses. That explains why Mr. Obama has dialed down the vocal support he gave demonstrators in Cairo to a more modulated call for peaceful protest and respect for universal rights elsewhere.
This emphasis on pragmatism over idealism has left Mr. Obama vulnerable to criticism that he is losing the battle for the hearts and minds of the Arab street protesters. Some say he is failing to bind the United States to the historic change under way in the Middle East the way that Ronald Reagan forever cemented himself in history books to the end of the cold war with his famous call to tear down the Berlin Wall.
“It’s tempting, and it would be easy, to go out day after day with cathartic statements that make us feel good,” said Benjamin J. Rhodes, the deputy national security adviser, who wrote Mr. Obama’s soaring speech in Cairo to the Islamic world in 2009. “But ultimately, what’s most important is achieving outcomes that are consistent with our values, because if we don’t, those statements will be long forgotten.”
On Thursday, Mr. Obama’s national security adviser, Thomas E. Donilon, deflected calls for more aggressive action in Libya, telling reporters what American officials have been saying privately for days: despite pleas from Libyan rebels for military assistance, the United States will not, at least for now, put its pilots in harm’s way by enforcing a no-flight zone over the country.
Not only is intervention risky, officials said, but they also fear that in some cases, it could be counterproductive, provoking a backlash against the United States for meddling in what is a homegrown political movement.
A senior administration official acknowledged the irony of Mr. Obama’s dilemma; he is, after all, the first black president, whose election was hailed on the Arab street, where many protesters identify their own struggles with the civil rights movement.
“There is a desire for Obama — not the American president, but Obama — to speak to their aspirations,” the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity. But, he added, “his first job is to be the American president.”
So Mr. Obama has thrown his weight behind attempts by the royal family of Bahrain, the home of the Navy’s Fifth Fleet, to survive, although protesters say their demands have not been met. He has said little about political grievances in Saudi Arabia, a major oil supplier, where there were reports on Thursday of a violent dispersal of Shiite protesters. And he has limited White House critiques of Yemen, where the government is helping the United States root out a terrorist threat, even after that government opened fire on demonstrators.
The more cautious approach contrasts sharply with Mr. Obama’s response in North Africa, where he abandoned a 30-year alliance with Hosni Mubarak of Egypt and has demanded the resignation of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi in Libya. But Mr. Obama is balancing his idealistic instincts against his reluctance to use military action in Libya, where the United States does not have a vital strategic interest. Mr. Donilon noted that the administration needed to keep its focus on the broader region, where allies like Egypt loom large.
The time is coming, administration officials said, for Mr. Obama to make another major speech taking stock of the upheaval. But its central message is not yet set, and there is likely to be lively debate about questions like whether the president should admit American complicity in propping up undemocratic governments in Egypt, Saudi Arabia and elsewhere.
“I don’t honestly think it would change much,” said a second senior official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. “It isn’t going to change the perception of the United States one way or the other. What will continue to affect the perception of the United States is what we do now.”
The White House will send Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton to Egypt and Tunisia next week, where officials said she would congratulate the protesters for sweeping out their leaders peacefully and offer aid to revive the nations’ economies. She had planned to stop in Riyadh, the Saudi capital, but canceled, officials said, because King Abdullah is too ill to meet her.
This underscores one of the difficulties the United States faces in dealing with Saudi Arabia, a crucial ally that is run by an aging, infirm ruling family that has refused to open the political system. Instead, the king tried to mollify his people by doling out $36 billion worth of pay raises, unemployment checks and housing subsidies.
Bahrain poses a different problem. There, King Hamad bin Isa al-Khalifa has pledged to enter a dialogue with the protestors, after having unleashed its security forces on them. Officials said Mr. Obama persuaded King Hamad to pull back his forces, which they said won the United States goodwill from the mostly Shiite demonstrators. But the talks have failed to get off the ground, and now some Shiites feel the Americans have sided against them.
“There is a sense among many Bahraini reformers that the U.S. is a bit too eager to praise progress toward dialogue and reform that has not yet happened, and that the premature praise is easing pressure on the government,” said Tom Malinowski, the head of the Washington office of Human Rights Watch.
“Striking a very balanced, and in many ways, neutral approach is recognized by many people in the region as not being with them, or on their side,” said J. Scott Mastic, the head of Middle East and North Africa for the International Republican Institute. “It’s very important that we be seen as supporting the demands of the people in the region.”
How Mr. Obama manages to do that while also balancing American interests is a question that officials acknowledge will plague this historic president for months to come. Mr. Obama has told people that it would be so much easier to be the president of China. As one official put it, “No one is scrutinizing Hu Jintao’s words in Tahrir Square.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/11/world/africa/11policy.html
Going to Brazil is in our interest - since Brazil is talking
[ In Reply To ..]nuclear tech with Iran. Brazil also has a space program they want to expand and we have technology for that. And, yes, they have oil. We get very little of our oil from the mid east. We don't need to have Brazil in cohoots w/ Iran at this time of unrest in the mid east. Unfortuneately, Brazil has a human rights issue that has kept them out of the UN. This is a huge obstacle to doing business there in order to maybe distract them from Iran.
agreed - icedT
[ In Reply To ..]Yes, I agree that going to Rio is in our interest. No argument there. Some people are just a little concerned about the timing of the trip, not the trip itself. Can't this be put off for a couple of days?
All that rage because the President likes basketball - Not a sports lover but really!
[ In Reply To ..]I'm finding that I have to take a break from all that is going on in the world. Presidents have traditionally continued to live, even during times of war. We do not want a President who cowers down and is defeated because there are problems in the world, many of which we have absolutely no control over unless we want to start another war.
Nor do we want one who is figuratively fiddling - while Rome is burning.
[ In Reply To ..]I did not see any rage. It's just kinda sad when the only news the Prez generates are his basketball tournament picks, especially while we are in two wars and our economy is in the tank. But oh well...inconsequential I guess to March Madness (oh where we could go with THAT one...lol).
But when he puts his own interests above a country asking for help, - Backwards Typist
[ In Reply To ..]and his help is to give another speech, to me, that's not a president, not a leader. He is allowing various government departments to run themselves without any oversight and he is allowing the fighting in Congress to continue; i.e., he's loving every minute of Congress's inability to get along.
I hope and pray the pubs come up with a decent candidate to run against him. If they do, I'm sure that candidate will win hands down.
If you are talking about Japan, - see message
[ In Reply To ..]If you are talking about Japan, President Obama offered help immediately, and was told that they had everything under control. We have continued to offer help and finally our help has been accepted, probably too late in this case, but it was offered and is taking place as we speak.
If you are talking about Egypt, they said they did not want our help.
If you are talking about Libya, it is unclear yet exactly where the rebels are going. Our leaders have been working with leaders all over the world to find a way to stop the massacre without going in and bombing, which is what one has to do in order to make a no fly zone, bomb the airports, etc., risking the lives of civilians, and also committing ourselves to still another war WHEN WE CANNOT AFFORD THE WARS WE ARE ALREADY IN, which we got into emotionally, using our heads and not our brains.
sm - iceT
[ In Reply To ..]I'll ask just once more and then I figure there must be no credible answer. Who said anything about war?
Who was the person(s) who put the option on the table of committing ourselves to another war?
Risking lives of civilians? I thought they were the ones who are being massacred in the streets of Libya by the regime? Did I miss something?
rage - iceT
[ In Reply To ..]I'm calling you on that statement of "all that rage." You read that as rage? Tell me you were kidding. If you are serious, tell me what words you read to interpret as rage.
Sorry, but no president - Democrat or Republican - gets a break from all that's going on in the world. It's time to reschedule the trip to Rio for the weekend. It's not a job that one can kick back and relax, especially while there is horrible human suffering going on in the world, not to mention the troops he sent into battle coming face to face with death on a daily basis. He will have plenty of time to party and relax after January 20, 2013.
Americans don't take a break when there is human suffering and tragedies.
And who said anything about starting another war? I don't know what you have been told in the past, but it's not true that conservatives want to start a war with every dictator in this world. What we want is peace through strength. Strength does not mean starting wars. Showing the U.S. as indecisive makes us appear weak in the eyes of the world and our enemies and that is very dangerous. The rest of the world is laughing at us and no one in the White House is concerned.
Similar Messages:
Seriously, Where IS Waldo?? We're Facing Lots Of Serious Jul 09, 2013
nm ...
Let's Play "Where's Waldo While The Mideast Burns?." Sep 24, 2012
fawning over Michelle. LOL I hope he keeps this stuff up. What an idiot. ...
Obama's Manning Decision: Obama's Dangerous Move Reveals Scary Take On National SecurityJan 18, 2017
The commutation of Chelsea Manning’s prison term will forever be a blot on President Obama’s legacy. Just as the pardon granted Marc Rich by President Clinton on his last day in office became a totem of the odious pay-to-play money grubbing of Bill and Hillary, l’affaire Manning will be an enduring reminder of Obama’s constant pandering to special voter groups and mindless adherence to a progressive agenda. It will also stand as testimony to President Obama’s questionable fealty to ...
Obama-Hillary Email Cover-up Gets Revealed: They Know Obama And HRC EmailedNov 02, 2016
http://conservativetribune.com/obama-hillary-email-coverup/?utm_ WikiLeaks has struck again, and this latest revelation proved that the White House, not only knew about former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email server, they also helped cover it up! ...
Obama-Hillary Email Cover-up Gets Revealed: They Know Obama And HRC EmailedNov 01, 2016
http://conservativetribune.com/obama-hillary-email-coverup/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_ WikiLeaks has struck again, and this latest revelation proved that the White House, not only knew about former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email server, they also helped cover it up! ...
Obama SKIPS Self-imposed Deadline Obama Agreed ToSep 10, 2012
Guess Obama too busy with his campaign to be bothered with the pesky little details of actually doing the Obama. White House Misses Deadline Outlining Defense Cuts By Jake Tapper | ABC OTUS News – Fri, Sep 7, 2012 White House officials today acknowledged that they had not met the deadline to outline how the president would make the defense cuts required by law to be made because of the failure of ...
Really Who Wants To See A Barack Obama/Michelle Obama Movie, Not I.Aug 26, 2016
...
Another List Of OBAMA LIES USING OBAMA'S OWN WORDS::Sep 02, 2012
This is a quite a long list. Enjoy! Please note OBAMA's words in quotes from OBAMA interviews, speeches, all freely stated nby OBAMA. ABC News year event 1995 In his memoir, Obama writes of one of the watershed moments of his racial awareness — time and again in remarkable detail. It is a story about a Life magazine article that influenced him. The report was about a black man who tried to bleach his skin white. When Obama was told no such article c ...
OBAMA LIE TALLY SCORE-""OBAMA LIES"" 15,892Sep 02, 2012
Your ability to "cling" to such a loser is another wonder of the world. The rest of us...why, we'll just cling to our guns and religion (Barry accusation) no to divide the masses). ...
This Is My ObamaDec 08, 2009
...
What Has Obama DoneJun 03, 2011
Some Obama supporters are getting tired of waiting. I don't blame them. I'm tired of waiting too. What Has Obama Done for African Americans? by Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor President Obama’s campaign operatives claim they now have a message for Black America, after more than two years of “I got nothin’ for you, man.” Blacks have their own page on the White House blog, but filling it up with substantive news may prove difficult. “F ...
ObamaAug 26, 2011
You know.. really.. the guy didn't stand a chance. I've heard from seemingly normal folks that he was: 1. The anti-Christ. 2. A Muslim from Kenya. 3. The birth certificate. 4. He's going to turn the good ol' US of A into a Socialist country. 5. He'll take away our guns. The only thing wrong with Obama is that he hasn't stood up to the republicans. The fella needs a little bit of the ol' Cheney (who giv ...
Way To Go ObamaJul 29, 2010
I just heard that today Obama signed the Tribal Law and Order Act. I may not know what this bill means in total, but my understanding is that it is to support justice on the reservations against violent crimes. I'll read more about it, but what I'm seeing so far of it I think it's a good thing. I have stated in the past if I feel he does something good I will post here and that's what I'm doing. I think this is a good thing (at least from what ...
ObamaJun 14, 2011
For those who support Obama, can you tell me why I should cast my vote him for another 4 years? Can you give specifics? ...
PES And ObamaApr 14, 2012
I know it's long (sorry), but it's one of the best articles I've read about what's at stake for the 2012 election. http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2012/01/22/is-president-obama-truly-a-socialist/ Is President Obama Truly A Socialist? Pew Research finds that sixty percent of Americans respond negatively to “socialism.” It is clear why President Barack Obama must avoid that label. Words are important. Political candidates who control the lan ...
Do Any Of You Know If You Are On Obama's Sep 09, 2012
nm ...
The Obama You Don't KnowSep 20, 2012
See the link. ...
Another Lie From ObamaSep 22, 2012
What is it they say about pathological liars? He lies so much he can't keep anything straight. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOVwCZ5TaPE&feature=player_detailpage ...
None Of Obama's 23Jan 16, 2013
would have stopped the Newtown massacre. Interesting, because Newtown was the impetus for the gun control hoopla being rammed down our throats. http://news.yahoo.com/obamas-23-executive-orders-gun-violence-171540897.html ...
Obama Did A No-noJan 25, 2013
DEVELOPING: Obama recess appointments unconstitutional, court In a case freighted with major constitutional implications, a federal appeals court on Friday overturned President Obama’s controversial recess appointments from last year, ruling he abused his powers and acted when the Senate was not actually in a recess. The three-judge panel’s ruling is a major blow to Mr. Obama. The judges ruled that the appointments Mr. Obama made to the National Labor Relations Board are illegal, and ...
Thanks, Obama! Apr 21, 2013
Fox's Kilmeade Blames Obama's Middle East Policy For Boston Marathon Bombings Blog ››› April 19, 2013 3:59 PM EDT ››› ERIC HANANOKI Fox News host Brian Kilmeade thinks he's found the explanation for how someone was able to set off bombs at the Boston Marathon: President Obama's supposed policy of "disengaging from the Middle East." Kilmeade linked the alleged actions of ...
Obama's DogJan 20, 2014
I wanted to read up on Portugeuse Water Dogs, but couldn't remember the name of the breed. I went to Google and typed obama d. The first "d" that popped up was obama divorce. Curious, I clicked on that and got 210,000,000 hits. I had no idea this was news?!? Granted, a lot of these are taboid articles, but might there be some truth to them? ...
ObamaFeb 11, 2014
I have been a life-long Democrat, as has almost my entire family. I have voted in every election since I was legally allowed to do so. There were times I split my vote, but for the most part, I voted the party line. Those times are fast ending in part because of the endless vile and abusive comments directed at ANYONE on this board not blinded to Obama’s faults, and there are many. No human being is flawless and that includes Obama – he is a ...
Obama's Still Got ItOct 21, 2014
On Sunday, President Obama hit the campaign trail in Maryland and Illinois. The following is from Josh Lederman's report, Associated Press October 19, 2014 (the Associated Press--a legitimate news source) * * * Roughly 8,000 people packed a high school gymnasium — with more in an overflow crowd next-door — where Obama adopted his party's mantra for this election season by claiming the midterms would come down to one thing: "Who is going to fight for you?" "The Republ ...
Obama Is NOT WelcomeOct 05, 2015
says publisher of Roseburg Beacon. ...
Vetting ObamaMar 05, 2012
Andrew Brietbart's new site http://www.breitbart.com/ has quite the eye-opening piece called "The Vetting, Part I: Barak's Love Song to Alinsky" You can read it here: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/03/04/obama-alinsky-love-song ...
Obama In His Own WordsFeb 29, 2012
Remember folks, these are Obama's words. On June 24, 2008, Obama said in demonizing Bush: What Washington has done is what Washington always does – it’s peddled false promises, irresponsible policy, and cheap gimmicks that might get politicians through the next election, but won’t lead America toward the next generation of renewable energy. And now we’re paying the price. Now we’ve fallen behind the rest of the world. Now we’re forced to beg Saudi Arabi ...
Democrats, Who Do You Want Obama To Run Against? Feb 28, 2012
Romney or Santorum? Other unknown? ...
Obama ApologyFeb 23, 2012
Sarah Palin: "Obama apologizes for the inadvertent Koran burning this week; now the U.S. trained and protected Afghan Army can apologize for killing two of our soldiers yesterday." ...
So, Now What, Obama? UnemploymentFeb 22, 2012
http://news.yahoo.com/unemployment-rate-quietly-hits-nine-percent-003900024.html ...