Wednesday, December 21, 2011

On the Job Straining

Let me start off by saying that I like President Obama. I think that he's both a good and decent family man and a patriotic American (he's especially proven effective at smoking terrorists). And, no, I don't think that he's been nearly as bad a President as some of my conservative colleagues have alleged. But I do think that he's been hampered by at least a couple of factors this term. a) The fellow had zero experience as an administrator (he's never, for example, been a governor, a mayor, or an executive of any kind) and b) he had perilously little experience in the private sector. In my opinion, had he had these experiences in his background, he probably would have been far better capable of marshaling a significantly better health-care plan, stimulus package, etc.......................................................................................................Now, is this to say that John McCain, or even Hillary Clinton, would have done a better job had they been elected? No, not at all (Mr. McCain especially seemed erratic back then). It just means that maybe, just maybe, a little more seasoning (I mean, really, what in the heck was he; a college professor, a community organizer, a state senator, a victor over the idiot, Alan Keyes?) wouldn't have hurt.

11 comments:

Truth 101 said...

it was disappointing that he and Rahm Emmanuel allowed their quest for nice titled legislation turn them into capitulators.


Particularly seeing as how they were from Chicago and not only should have known how to play hardball.

This last instance though of Obama staring down the house republicans and them giving in on the payroll tax cut extension shows he's figured it out. Maybe his new chief of staff, Daly, deserves some credit. Don;t know. But as a former low level poilitical hack, even I know that you can;t trust the opposition to do what's right if they think it will help you.

Rational Nation USA said...

Truth, Question for you.

Does your last sentiment in this comment apply to both parties in your opinion? Or do you see it as limited to only your party's opposition?

Thank you for your consideration of my question in advance.

Friends of Voltron said...

Yeah, because it makes so much better sense to have the payroll tax cut extended for only two months as opposed to the YEAR the Republicans wanted...

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

I think that we could all agree that the stimulus package (labyrinth is probably a more accurate term) and health-care bill could have been a quantum leap better. Laying back and letting a couple of dolts like Pelosi and Reid run the show was a humongous miscalculation.......And miscalculating was exactly what Boehner did on this payroll tax extension thing, too. Yes, Volt, a 12 month deal would have been preferable but when the Senate sends you an 89-10 vote, the dude really needs to pick his shots and not his nostrils down there.

Rational Nation USA said...

Pelosi and Reid are dolts every bit as much as Boner is.

Time to clean house. Starting at the top and working done.

And yes, a year would have been better I suppose. Either way the can is kicked down the road.

dmarks said...

Truth: Rahm knew how to play hardball. Remember how he bashed the mentally disabled as "f***ing retards". Takes a brave man like him to viciously attack those who, due to their disabilities, can't fight back or play hardball as well as he can.

Truth 101 said...

Too bad Rahm was playing hardball against the helpless and not focusing his efforts and talents against republicans and making America an even better place.


Sometimes party discipline has to be enforced RN. That goes for both parties.

w-dervish said...

dmarks: Remember how he bashed the mentally disabled as "f***ing retards".

No, I don't remember that. Because it never happened. He made the "f***king r*tards" comment, but it was directed at Liberals, not actual mentally challenged people.

Certainly Rham can be criticized for his insensitive use of the "R" word, but, dmarks get your facts straight! He was talking about Liberals. You saying that he was bashing actual mentally challenged people is a lie.

Voltron: ...as opposed to the YEAR the Republicans wanted...

Nonsense! The Republicans "wanted" nothing of the sort. That was their excuse to oppose the legislation. The only tax cuts Republicans are concerned about are those for wealthy people. They don't give a damn about working people.

"Rational" Nation: Time to clean house. Starting at the top and working done.

I'm voting for Obama. And I've got my fingers crossed that the Democrats retake the House and Nancy Pelosi is once again elected Speaker.

dmarks said...

WD lied: "No, I don't remember that. Because it never happened. He made the "f***king r*tards" comment, but it was directed at Liberals, not actual mentally challenged people."

Such hate speech is always directed at the actual victims in the end. Do you honestly believe that when white people use "...like a n*****" -style terms when they insult each other, they are not being racist toward black people? Of course they are. Just like the homophobic "gay"-as-an-insult problem.

This is also just like Republican leader Michael Steele, who used the "Injun" word. While not intentionally directed at Native Americans, just like with Rahm's blast of hatred, they were the actual victims.

I got my facts straight. You are lying when you are fabricating the claim that Rahm was not bashing the mentally disabled. Your claim is simply not true.

Perhaps if you read this web site, you might stop making stuff up.

Face it, WD. Rahm was bashing the mentally disabled, and you are only giving him a free pass because he's a leftist. To the point where you lied about his statement.

w-dervish said...

I did not "lie". I was talking about who Rham was directing his comment to. I also am not "giving him a free pass". I said it was insensitive.

Did you miss that part? I think you intentionally missed it, so you could lie about me "supporting" him because he's a "leftist". Some "leftist"... insulting Liberals.

In my opinion dmarks should stop making stuff up about Moderate and Conservative Democrats being Liberals and Leftists. Also, dmarks should stop lying about "measuring from the center". dmarks doesn't know where the center is.

dmarks said...

WD said: "o you could lie about me "supporting" him because he's a leftist. Some leftist..

No. I am referring to actual leftists. Not any so-called leftists. So there are no quotes necessary.

Reality check...

Question. If one white person uses the N-word in an insult against another white person. is the first one being racist against blacks?

"Also, dmarks should stop lying about "measuring from the center". dmarks doesn't know where the center is."

It's easy to tell: it is the place that is not on the left or right wing. A place like where Will and the moderates sit.

A place with the least partisanship.

By the way, for the record, I have never identified any moderates as leftists. I use this proper description only for actual left-wingers.