Sunday, October 04, 2009
SNL is a little disappointed with President Obama.
I think President Obama can expect more of this kind of treatment if liberals do not start to see the things they voted for coming to fruition.
I still have hope, but it is in all lower case letters now.
2008 was HOPE I CAN BELIEVE IN!
2009 is hope I can barely remember.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I saw this skit. It was not funny. The sad part was it was true. My hope is fading as well. I wish he would rip open his shirt, expose thst big O and kick some but. Our Nation is in serious trouble.
ReplyDeleteNYCgirl
Let's see. President Obama took office the 3rd week of January, 2009. So he's been there in office 8 months and a week. I am willing to give the man YEARS before I start complaining. I'm more liberal than many people who comment here, if you believe the quizzes that match you with current politicians. I match 100% with Dennis Kucinich.
ReplyDeleteAbout this skit: Armisen's impersonation seemed off here, IMO. My husband thought so, too. Usually FA is quite funny in his presidential impressions. But this was too manic.
Obama took office the day after I lost my job. I wonder if he needs any help on the hill?
ReplyDeleteStill waiting for that influx of stim money Mr President.
I am ashamed of you, Gryphen! How CAN you be so fickle? As Anonymous 6:55 indicated, the man has been in office less than nine months! How can you be so jaded? The president was handed a plate of shit and you want him to abracadabra and have it all come right?
ReplyDeleteLet's support him, not step on him. He's had enough of that!
I fully agree with Anonymous@6.55a. Obama has been in office far less than a year and he is cleaning up after the worst administration in recent memory - or of all time, depending on your knowledge of American history.
ReplyDeleteAlso, some of Obama's followers are as ideologically "pure" as Sarah Palin's wingbats on the Right. Obama is NEVER going to do everything the ultra liberal base wants him/expects him to do. Ain't gonna happen. This country is governed by expediency in many cases. A true liberal would never get the things done that badly need doing. I have had a feeling all along that he would disappoint many of this followers for not being ideologically liberal enough to suit them. Maybe because I am 58 and have been a passionate student of politics for well over 40 years, I can appreciate a little more what has to happen to make government work.
So, please, all you Dems who are disappointed in Obama, don't be. He's doing a pretty good job navigating the minefield of America and the world's problems.
Also, who the hell do you think could do a better job? Dennis Kucinich?
Anonymous @ 6:55
ReplyDeleteI agree. Let's give our President some more time. He has enough negativity surrounding him already. We don't need to contribute more. Yes, let's continue to hold him accountable but it's also important for us to exercise some patience. Damn the man has only been in office for 8 months. Now in 18 months maybe we can start to lose hope but as for now we need to hang in there.
I am still convinced that we will get change we can believe in even with the GOP and some in his own party trying to hold him back.
And on another note, I do want our President's Administration to revisit the Patriot Act but I do worry that in doing so it just may put our President in harms way. With a 400% increase in death threats compared to the worst President in history, G W Bush and all of the hatred and bigotry we are seeing from possible domestic terrorists on the right, it might be best they keep some aspects of the Patriot Act in place for now or until those 30 death threats per day against our President are considerably lower.
STOP IT!!!
ReplyDeleteJust what we need,more whining.Maybe he should have used these words-"Ask not what your country can do for you,ask what you can do for your country"
Evryone out their whining because President Obama has not solved their problem yet should ask themselves exactly that.
I'm in your camp, Anon 7:20
ReplyDeleteWow...liberals are their own worst enemies every single time.
ReplyDeleteThe president can't make "change" by himself and he told us that all through the campaign.
It isn't about him, it's about us.
He's only been in office for 9 months. He came into an economic disaster with global ramifications. The word economy teetered on the brink of collapse.
And now, 9 months later, liberals sit around and complain about the lack of change?
What about all of the things he has done to save the environment, reversals of Bush's devil may care attitudes? He's signed so many things into law that change our lives and impact things for the better, and yet, things aren't perfect and so liberals complain.
If I hear one more liberal call the wars Obama's "viet nam" I will throw up. Way to buy the right's talking points. As if he can just pull out because we don't like war. He did say he would vote against it when everyone else voted for it...and he's done major efforts toward global disarmament and peace...but still, liberals act like children and whine about what is.
We can't just pull out. We never should have gone in...but we did. Now we have to deal with that.
We can never win or rule anything because liberals on the ground have NO COURAGE to stand by their people and think big picture.
If we can't stand by our man during the tough times, we aren't entitled to the rewards that come later and we won't get them.
The next time liberals want to complain about there being no change (which is not true and therefore not a valid criticism) they should just go out and buy a Palin 2012 sticker, because that is exactly how we got W.
After we all bought into the Clinton witch trials and left our guy hanging in the wind at the mercy of the "right".
I am so disgusted by the left and their inability to strategize and their lack of loyalty and faith. I love Bill Maher, but even he thinks he's being cool by ciming there's no change; he's not being cool- he's being adolescent and he's wrong.
False equivalencies like that equal another Bush presidency- so keep it up guys.
I will blame you when Sarah Palin bans certain books and then you can tell me how Obama had "no change".
Oh, and that reminds me, he did get rid of the expanded powers of the executive office- you know, the fascist dictoratorship we had running this "democracy" where the DoJ was run by the WH and the WH ignored Congress....
but sure, there's "no change".
And I'm sure there'll be no difference between SArah Palin as gov and a nice Dem, right?
Except that the government won't be used as a weapon of mass destruction.
How soon we forget.
I'd like to see the complainers of the President to run for President to see how you think it is easy to get things done.
ReplyDeleteNot to be unduly critical, Gryphen, because I regularly visit and enjoy your site, but I find your criticism of lack of progress of the Obama administation rather ironic in view of your own eight months of promising an "iceberg" or "knock out punch" on Palin, while producing very little, other than linking to the discoveries of others. I am losing "hope" that you will accomplish your promises.
ReplyDeleteDoesn't surprise me at all considering how short of an attention span the average American has.
ReplyDeleteI think the expectations that many people had of what President Obama could accomplish in his first year were more than a little unrealistic -- but saving the economy from collapsing does warrant some more credit than it is getting, I daresay. I do feel that the Democrats in Congress better get their collective act together pretty soon, or they will perpetuate the stereotype of the undisciplined, ineffective party that they so often prove to be. That will doom both them and the President's agenda.
ReplyDeleteThe Chicago Olympics bid is a great example of the "damned if you do, damned if you don't" dilemma that President Obama is in. If he had NOT gone to Copenhagen, he would have been blamed for the loss and not giving it his best try, and I can assure you that the right-wingers would have eaten his lunch. So, he went, gave it a good try, and lost. The fact that South America had never hosted an Olympics was a very hard hand to trump. I personally feel it was worth a try, albeit losing a little political capital in the effort. He would have lost more if he hadn't gone, IMHO.
In the meantime, we all can and should continue to press for the change that we can believe in -- don't be discouraged! We're all in it for the long haul. It doesn't mean we'll get all that we want, but I'm willing to wager that, if we keep pushing our legislators to do the right thing, we'll make some decent progress.
I am surprised at the people who have lost "hope" in President Obama. He has 8 years of crap to try and deal with, and work towards fixing, on top of that he is dealing with the health care issue, and roughly 35% of the country who are seemingly out to portray him as this betrayal of all things American, with the rest of the country silent on their support of his agenda to fix this country.
ReplyDeleteWhile I may not agree with what he does 100%, I am willing to give the man a chance and understand that what he was handed by the previous president is going to take years to fix.
Liberals need to get their heads out of their ass and support the president. Hell, I am not a liberal, and I am willing to give him a chance just like I give every president a chance. This complaining about things before he is even a full year into the presidency considering the "state of our nation" is ridiculous!
I don't think it's "stepping" on Obama to express disappointment with some of his decisions. I voted for Obama. I volunteered for his campaign. But I got really bad feelings about his attempts to get the Olympics for Chicago. It seemed like a real gamble, and one that could hurt him politically if it went badly, which it did. I do worry that he's buying into his own hype while failing to realize that the honeymoon period won't last forever, even among those who support him. The country is in a real mess. The fact that Bush put us there is irrelevant. The majority of voters picked Barack Obama to change things and while the SNL skit may be seen by some as cruel, there's a ring of truth to it.
ReplyDeleteWe don't *have* years to turn this around. We need to start seeing some improvement now and it looks like a lot of what we progressives had hoped to see just isn't coming to pass. And that's a shame, especially given that there's a Democratic majority.
So I'm with Jesse on this one. It's not that those who express concern aren't supporting the president. We're just honest enough not to be *blindly* supportive. Leave that to the fringe and the partisans, which are sadly abundant in both parties.
Gryphen, I cannot believe you even went there. You must not be watching. President Obama has accomplished a lot since he has been in office.
ReplyDeleteI do have to wonder why he went. Did he really believe that what he said would matter?
ReplyDeleteUnless there was some money or some additional inticement going on under the table.
Chicago and the American sports world are big kids they don't really need his help.
Surely a POTUS has more important things to do, and better ways to spend tax dollars.
Gryphen, maybe you think there should have been a McCain/Palin win.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous @ 8:20
ReplyDeleteGET OVER IT! President Obama took a few hours out of his day to support Chicago, which I recall is a city in the United States of America, in a bid for the Olympics. What's the big deal? I am sure that he believed that he could make a difference that's why he went, duhhh! I can appreciate President Obama for standing up for the country he loves. Win or lose, this is our country and we ALL should want what's best for it. The olympics would have brought much needed money from tourism to our great country. To all of these idiots making such a big deal out of this, they need to get a life and start looking for ways that they can try and make a difference. Just a damn shame!
"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." --M. L. King
I agree with those who say that as far as the Olympics, President Obama was darned if he did (go to Copenhagen) and darned if he didn't. If he didn't go and Chicago lost, Obama would be blamed. If he did go, the Right would say he was wasting time. I think that he made the right decision to go. I also am willing to give the man more time before I start complaining too much. He inherited a mess and the Congress are acting like a bunch of preschoolers. I see very little love of country displayed in the antics of the congress these days. It is very disheartening.
ReplyDeleteGosh, Gryphen, have a heart! It took eight years to put this nation in the cesspool that it is in. I think Obama should be given the same time to get it out. Did you think he had a magic wand, or maybe you think he actually has Excalibur? You need fifty lashes with a wet noodle. Certainly we have waited patiently for at least nine months for you to come through with your info.
ReplyDelete8:20 AM
ReplyDeleteNot sure that I agree with you there. The potential for jobs and income from bringing the Olympics to anywhere in the US in the near future would have huge impact and not just in the Chicago area, but far wider. It was a quick trip to try to close the deal. The same way a sales team will bring in the CEO on a big deal to help close it. It's too bad we didn't get it. but I'm glad Rio did. They deserve it just as much if not more.
I'm with Anonomous 7:41. Miracles in 7 days are best left up to God. Obama is a wonderful, but not that mightly. 8 years of doing, will take about 8 years of undoing, maybe less, maybe more depending on Congress. He can't do it alone.
ReplyDeleteAnonomous 8:20 Don't forget, not only was he there in Copenhagen for the Olympics, which if it was successful, would have brought a lot of economic stimulous and jobs in America, he also met with Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal aboard Air Force One, to discuss Afganistan, which is extremely important. So our tax dollars are hard at work. It wasn't a waste, at least for me.
I am with all the rest Gryphen. Give the man a break, it's been months since he took office-it took years to create this cesspool. We can start doubting and complaining this early in his career, but why have the all those 'criminals' in DC gone untouched for decades, and re elected time and time again?
ReplyDeleteI would usually let this thread just continue without comment, but let me clarify a thing or two.
ReplyDeleteI DO NOT expect Obama to have fixed everything that George Bush screwed up by this date.
I DO know that he has a lot on his plate.
I Do still support him 100%.
I DID work my ass off to help him get elected.
Therefore.....I DO have the right to express some frustration that he has not been as forceful with the Republicans as I had hoped that he would.
Has he done some very important and necessary things? You betcha!
But I have to express my exasperation that Gitmo is not closed, the war in Iraq is still going on with no real end in sight, that health care reform seems to be spinning it's wheels, and that the objective in Afghanistan seems to be a permanent military presence.
Those things concern me. And I believe they should concern ALL of us.
Remember we get the government we deserve, so if we stay silent we have only ourselves to blame if things go off track. We bitched about the Republicans supporting Bush when he stole our freedoms and started illegal wars, are we to follow THEIR example?
Look I am open to your criticisms and respect your opinions. I have after allowed a lot of negative comments to be posted.
I just hope that Obama is following MY example and listening to the voices that may in fact be less interested in kissing his ass, and more interested in helping him to be the best President that America could hope for in these trying times.
I for one think he has that capacity so let's help him to realize it.
Good greif! He has been in office less than a YEAR! At least he is working on healthcare reform in his first year! If he gets that done, he will have done something no other president has ever been able to do! And we've never been closer! It would be a historic peice of legislation! I can't believe some people expect him to get everything done in one year! Most of the things they checked off on SNL are things he never promised would take effect right aaway, anyway. For one thing, he never said the troops were coming out of Iraq, right away! Except for maybe gays in the military. Just because the democrats have the majority, doesn't mean anything! The blue-dog "democrats" are the problem. They supported everything George W. Bush did, but they try to fight everything Barack Obama does. By the way, JFK promised a lot too. When JFK was president, the democrats had the majority in the house and senate, and he got very little done, as well. Barack Obama is already on his way to accomplishing more than JFK did. Why the double standard? Barack Obama is not a dictator, and liberals like you "Gryphen," are not helping the president by joining the right-wing cheerleaders who want him to fail!
ReplyDeleteAnd yes, Morgan is right, the majority of voters did pick Obama to fix things. What else would they elect a black man to the highest office in the land to do? Many won't admit it but I will. Obama would not have been elected as the President of the United States of America if shit wasn't as bad as it could get. America (people wanting a change especially whites) did to Obama exactly what the RNC has done to Michael Steele - both are black men given an opportunity to dig out of a very deep damn hole while getting bricks thrown at them in process. I think Obama will be alright but I truly hope he understands that his being POTUS has more to do with where we were economically at the time and the fact that he was the opposition party versus some people actually believing in his ability to really make necessary change. I believe he will prove all of you naysayers wrong. He better, because regardless of how bigot, racist, hateful, unpatriotic, unethical and deceitful the GOP is, America will turn on Obama in 2012 if not just a few but many things don't improve. My belief is that for the first time in history (I think) a sitting President will have someone run against him in the primaries. Democrats will turn against Obama just so they won't lose the white house. So sad but true.
ReplyDeleteIt is not that nothing is acomplished, it is that there is not even a hint that it is going in any direction. He promised bipartisanship, we realized early that was not going to happen. Forget about it and move on. However one mut realize, part of the reason it is not happenning is there is nothing concrete for Republicans to agree to. It is easy to be a party of NO when there is little to say yes to.
ReplyDeleteHealth care plan. What health care plan? Call it the Breakfast Plan because all it is is a waffle. The polls tell us that the majority of the people are not happy with the way the president is handling health care reform. The Right is capitalizing on that as evidence that Americans don't want reform. I believe it is because he is not getting TRUE Reform.
He has a big majority in the house and a super majority in the senate and he cannot get anywhere near a consensus. People hunger for change. The numbers in Congress are there, but the man cannot pull it together.
Nobody expects to recover from the past eight years overnight, but for God's sake Democrats, grow a set and show some leadership.
Ever heard of I.F. Stone, (1907-1989) Gryphen? He was the first blogger, before the internet existed. He was also a progressive. He "blogged" in real-time during the Kennedy administration. This is what a progressive "blog" would have looke like during "The New Frontier."
ReplyDeletewww.ifstone.org.
‘The Untold Story of the Drug Bill Sellout’ (I.F. Stone’s Weekly, June 18, 1962)
‘Hardly Setting An Example of Adherence to World Law’ (I.F. Stone’s Weekly, May 28, 1962) Page 4
‘JFK Gives Witch Hunters Power to Look at Everybody's Tax Returns’ (I.F. Stone’s Bi-Weekly, June 10, 1963)
‘Basic Economic Ills No Mere Tax Cut Can Cure’ (I.F Stone’s Bi-Weekly, March 4, 1963)
“The President's program seems based on the view that if taxes are cut among the more fortunate elements of our society, some of it will trickle down. Much of it, on the contrary, will only trickle into the cash surpluses of the big corporations and the wealthy.”
‘Civil Rights Compromise Stronger Than Kennedys Wanted’ (I.F. Stone’s Bi-Weekly, Nov. 11, 1963)
It wouldn't be the first time in history. Jimmy Carter was a one-term president. It doesn't happen very often, though. If the economy gets better, and not worse, he will be re-elected. Passing healthcare reform will be a big help to the economy. It appears that he may be very close to passing healthcare reform. He hasn't been president one year, yet. He's still got time to address other concerns of progressives. They won't get everything they want, but there's still time.
ReplyDeleteI think Obama went to Chicago to support America. Our chances of winning the bid were slim and none. The committee has to look at the ability of the hosting city to provide the proper facilities for the events, spectators, judges, and athletes. As I recall, Chicago is having deep financial problems as are all American cities. They also look at the infrastructure and security concerns. It would be a risk to allow the Olympics to be in Chicago at this time. If you do some research, you will find that it is unusual for any hosting city to make a profit on the games. In fact, they usually go deeply in debt. I think LA was the only city to pull it off without going into debt because they used many existing facilities and didn't have to invest in the building of all new venues. The choosing of Olympic sites is not a popularity contest. Being a hosting city is extremely expensive and complicated, and the committee has to feel sure that all aspects of the games can be pulled off without a hitch.
ReplyDeleteAnd I forgot to add. Giving our POTUS more than 8 -9 months to fix problems that took 8 or more years to create does not mean that people are "blindly" supporting him and not holding him accountable. It could mean that we are just being realistic and not letting other factors keep us from giving our POTUS a fair chance.
ReplyDeleteSince the Olympics were not a campaign promise, I'm much less concerned about that incident (although I am sorry we missed out on the potential jobs it would have created).
ReplyDeleteObama stated frequently on the campaign trail and when he first took oath that fixing the economy was not going to happen quickly, that it might take years. On that front, I think people are simply scared because so many have lost their jobs (count me among them). But I have faith in him to get the job done.
But I am with Gryphen on a few things. Gitmo, repeal of the patriot act and DADT.
As far as the health care issue goes, I am disappointed that Obama has not been more forceful in his stand on having a public option. He appeared to back down somewhat (not completely) when all the Fox-produced opposition at town halls started gaining steam.
But! That being said, I am more pissed off at the Blue Dog democrats (jackasses) that can't pull their heads out for a bill that their own constituents want.
Getting off my soap box now.
Oh, and god bless Alan Grayson!
I support President Obama, Gryphen, Morgan, and Naked Truth. The best thing we can do for America right now is to speak truth to power to all our leaders. Let's start with Babygate!
ReplyDeleteThank God McCain/Palin are not the in White House. Instead of complaining about losing the Olympics bid, we could be in the middle of another war, with Iran. And health care would not even be on the table, etc., etc.
ReplyDeleteThe MSM has been hi-jacked, so to speak, by the teabaggers, the birthers, the GOP mouthpieces, even by Palin with all her family drama as well as Sanford and Ensign. Drowning out those voices for change.
I read that Boehner (R-OH) said he has not met anyone who was for the public option. Bachmann called a health care clinic in schools a sex clinic. Palin and Huckaboo stepped on foreign soil to dis the President's policies. Perry has talked about Texas seceding from the Union. Lobbyists are buying influence in Congress to go against health care reform. Blue Dogs Democrats are siding with the GOP. And the list goes on....
Methinks those voices for change should turn up the volume really loud, on Congress! Oh, and Grayson, he's my hero!
I have to agree with the majority of the posters. Give President Obama a chance. No other president in history has had to deal with a recession that brought us to the brink of disaster and a war that has the propensity to be expanded not contracted. President Roosevelt had the Great Depression. He feared the worst. However, he had a Congress that was willing to work together to effect change. If you want to place responsibility on anyone, it is both sides in the Congress. These men and women have become partisan hacks who vote with contributions in mind from lobbyists. They are so busy pandering to special interests in order to keep their seats, that they forget about the majority of Americans who need to see change.
ReplyDeleteNo matter what the President does, he is considered wrong by one or the other party. Its time to stop blaming Presient Obama for not having a magic wand and putting the responsibility on Congress.
The thing is, he doesn't have a spandex O under his shirt. He's human.
ReplyDeleteI think in a year from now we’ll be saying “Give Obama a break. He’s only been in Office for less than 2 years.” But, I think we’re going to find that Obama’s governing skills don’t live up to his campaign rhetoric. I still believe what I believed in during his campaign, but I just don’t think we’ve found the right politician yet who’s skilled enough to deliver. I’m not trying to be negative; it’s just that sometimes you don’t get to where you want to be on the first try.
ReplyDeleteI like Obama personally, but from what I’ve seen with my own lying eyes, I’m doubtful he’s got it in him to bring “Change We Can Believe In.”
One last point: when 3 Democratic Senators can undermine the will of 65% of the American people (and the majority of their own party) and deny us the public option, that tells me that the Democratic Party is no longer democratic. We gave them a supermajority in both Houses, and they go to Washington to represent themselves and their corporate interests, and not the people who voted them into office (Cue the Lee Greenwood music: put your hand over your heart, and wave the little flags on a stick…is this a great country or what?).
I'm not so sure about that, Naked Truth. The Democratic Party would be taking a huge risk with its loyal African American supporters if they put someone up to run against Obama. I don't think they can take the risk of alienating the black vote by casting Obama aside in the primaries.
ReplyDeleteI've long maintained that the reason that the media hasn't really gone after Sarah is that they are secretly hoping she *would* run in 2012 since she would be such a disaster that Obama could beat her no matter how badly his first term goes. I do agree that it's going to be tough going for him in 2012, even if things improve. I'm hoping for a weak GOP candidate. At the moment, all of them look pretty lame, and that makes me happy.
And I have to also take issue with you about how you characterize Obama's white supporters. I am one of them and I did not support Obama out of any sense of desperation. I did not see him as an expendable president based on his race. I saw - and see - in him a great intellect and a passion to change things for the better. Those are Obama's strengths. His weakness may be his strong desire to be liked. Since he's been in office I've seen him playing too much to the cameras, trying a little too hard to win over those people who can't be won over. There's a time to be popular and then there's a time to be tough. Obama's time to be tough is now. He needs to stop worrying about being liked and start kicking some ass.
The man has enemies, and when they try to destroy you the best thing to do is roll over them while you have the strength to do it. He has a majority of Democrats in his corner now. He needs to use those numbers to his benefit. You can't reach across the aisle if the people on the other side have their backs to you.
All presidents promise a whole lot, and don't deliver on campaign promises. It's always a lot of rhetoric. Things won't be perfect, but the econmy will get better, and he'll be re-elected. Passing healthcare reform will boost the economy. If he passes a good healthcare bill, it will be a game changer.
ReplyDeleteAnd to the people who are saying, "Well, would you be happier if McCain/Palin had won?" Puleaze, people.
ReplyDeleteIf I go to the best restaurant in town and announce that the meal is not quite what I expected, that is NOT the same thing as saying I wish I'd just gone to McDonalds. It simply means that I respect the restaurant enough to expect exemplary results.
Not the best analogy, perhaps, but for clarity's sake I'm hoping those who can see the difference will see the difference...
He'll get re-elected. Proably not by a landslide, but he will win re-election. Things won't be perfect, but they will improve. Passing healthcare reform, would be a big help.
ReplyDeleteGeez. A couple of things were true, but for the most part, SNL was unfair. It hasn't been one-year, yet. Barack Obama is at work, on most of those things, and he's still got time. Passing healthcare reform would prove them wrong.
ReplyDeleteMorgan,
ReplyDeleteSorry that you took issue to what I said. Unfortunately, I have had too many white people admit to me that they voted for Obama because they felt they had no other choice - meaning that he was the Democratic nominee and they couldn't vote Republican. Not because of what you said about him being a "great intellect". Now you can fool yourself all you want to but President Obama must perform to be re-elected in 2012 and the Democratic Party has no problem alienating the African American community if necessary to maintain power. Plus you must keep in mind that African Americans normally vote Democratic (90% of the time) even when the candidate is white. This voting block is and always has been taken for granted by the Democratic Party especially since the Republicans continue to have a lovefest with the extreme right-wing bigots in their party.
And another thing, wonder why we don't see more Democratic leaders denouncing the pure hate Obama is receiving from the right wingnuts? They would throw him under the bridge faster than you can say 2012. Just like some of you who can't even be patient enough to give the man more than 8-9 months to make good of his promises. Never say never just always be prepared.
As for Obama trying to make everybody like him, I don't agree with you on that. I think that he is very calculating and understands that he must try the bi-partisan approach before shoving shit down people's throat. He preached bi-partisanship during his campaign and he's trying to make it work. I say he has a timeline and once it's ended you will see a different Obama. I think that time is nearing. He won't be able to take much more of this.
Obama is still doing a fine job. He was handed a total mess. Messes of this magnitude don't get fixed in one year. He told us that in the beginning. He is a smart, no, a brilliant guy. He needs time. Americans are not long view people, unfortunately. Americans are foolish and want quick fixes. There are NO quick fixes to ANY of our current problems.
ReplyDeleteRe: the Olympic games. Good for the Brazilians! They deserve it! We are NOT the only country on the face of the earth. Be happy for someone else for a change for crying out loud!
Oh and my thought as to why the MSM won't blow the Babygate issue out of the water has nothing to do with them secretly wanting Palin to run for President in 2012. I am sure they know that's not going to happen. I think it's because they (MSM) really can't bring themselves to expose a woman that received 46+% of American votes as VP with such a scandalous past. It's all about covering for Sarah and I wonder why? Maybe they just want to let things be since Sarah has already damaged the 'hardworking woman' image in America. You know, we women that actually had to have 'great intellect' to climb political and corporate ladders. But of course, this is just my opinion. It's o.k. that others have theirs.
ReplyDeleteI was there when Barack Obama was sworn in and I felt tremendous hope. I still do, but after reading this post, I admit that it is fading a bit. Why? Not because he has not been able in eight months to turn around the biggest national disaster on mulitple fronts that has ever been handed any President since the Great Depression and World War II, not because those on the irrational fringe of the right have lost their minds and the more rational of the right lacks the courage to call them on it, but because impatient Democrats and liberals seem to lack the spine and staying power to stick with him and give him some time.
ReplyDeleteMy God! The man faces the greatest challenge faced by any individual in the world. Give him some time! He is working at it. It is complicated. Back him up!
Obama's Inaugural as I saw it:
http://wasillaalaskaby300.squarespace.com/journal/category/obama-inaugural
I agree with the majority of posters. The President has many obstacles and challenges to overcome. He needs our support and encouragement. And the opposition must hear our voices.
ReplyDeleteNaked Truth, I know a lot of white people who voted for Obama and not one of them has said they voted for him because they felt they had no choice. For reference, I live in the South where voting for a black candidate is a huge leap forward. North Carolina went blue this year for the first time in ages. Did it help Obama that George Bush completely sucked? Uh, yeah. But Obama meant more to white voters (at least the ones I know) than a desperation pick. I think many people sensed a good man with good character.
ReplyDeletePer the African American vote. You're right; it would take a lot for the Dems to alienate that bloc. But it COULD be done, and if they throw Obama under the bus while black voters may not leave the party I'm thinking that a lot of them would be so upset that they'd stay home and refuse to vote. In a critical election like 2012 that could spell success for the Republicans. I can't see them taking that risk. I just can't.
And FYI, I don't take issue with you or your point. It's an opinion, as is mine. I just don't happen to agree.
Thanks Morgan,
ReplyDeleteI do know that you value others opinions and I as well. I live in the South also - born in Alabama but moved away after college. I now live in Georgia so I know what you mean by voting for a black candidate was "a huge leap forward" for many white Southerners. I applaud those that did vote for the most qualified candidate but do know that each could have had their own reasoning for doing so. As I said before, unfortunately many (not all) white people I've encountered do say that they had no choice but to vote for Obama because he was a democrat. Some of these white people, of course, were Union members, school teachers or had some other interest that made them loyal to the Democratic party and not all were from the South, believe it or not. See Morgan, sometimes the color of the green dollar is more important than the color of a person's skin. But unlike some Republicans, at least these people knew not to vote against their own interests just because the candidate didn't share their race.
I truly believe that until ALL Democrats (white, black, Latino/Hispanic, Asian, etc.) get on board and fully support our President and force the leaders of the Democratic Party to denounce this hateful rhetoric and support our President's agenda to get the country back on track we all will face the possibility of the Democratic Party failing in 2010 and 2012.
And as for Obama possibly facing a primary candidate in 2012, there was already talk of this in the MSM a few months ago and he was only about 4-5 months into his presidency. I am sure you can probably Google it and see for yourself.
Well, NakedTruth, I'm white and I voted for Obama because I believe that he is a man of integrity and intelligence and believes in peace.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous @ 7:13 PM
ReplyDeleteGood for you. :-)
"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." --M. L. King
I just lost my post because I couldn't hold it in my browser when the program decided it didn't recognize me and I should sign in again, and then I retyped it all in Word but can't transfer the data here. Why does this site not have a cut and paste feature?
ReplyDeleteI sure hope Naked Truth is right that we will see a new Obama soon. I'd like him to stand before congress and say that unless they come up with a bill that includes a public option, he will veto. Let the screaming begin, stick to your guns, and there will be plenty of time for the people to figure out that they like what they got.
ReplyDeleteSure, some white people had various routes to voting for him, but I am convinced that the great majority really liekd what they saw. If race wee that important, we'd have Hillary, but we don't. My daughter said she and her liberal college friends were tired of the assumption they had voted for him BECAUSE he was black. fact is, the guy is polite, respectful, intelligent, rational, and has a good, clear-eyed smile. I like him so much I can hardly believe it and that is what helps e to hang in there...I just can't disbelieve my gut instinct that this is a good man.
And yet it is true that there was no option but to vote for him. I never fote for a democrat or a republican. I vote 3rd party every time. But I even ditched Ron Paul in the primaries for him. Partly because I like him so much, but also because McCain was the scariest sh** I've ever seen come down the pike. He had no interest in being a president without a war, and as for Palin, anyone who voted for the chance of her becoming president should not be trusted with the vote.
Perhaps the gods set things up so that he would run against a clown. Sometimes you have to make a really easy test to get the dunces to all pass...but we did it!
Censor?
ReplyDeleteFox "News"
ANTI 911 TRUTH
All Israeli all the time
Neocon News Network
William J Fallon UNREST
Complete Corruption effect
The "Federal" Reserve flush with cash
All MSM Propagandists singing same song
Ventura Sheehan Perot Paul Nader McKinney Kucinich Kaptur Gravel Gonzalez Clemente Choate Carter Baldwin Anderson
Grayson too?
This might be nit picking on my part but it really bugs me. Every time I type the name, "Obama" the good folks at Spell Check inform me that I have gotten the spelling wrong. Here are their suggested corrections:
ReplyDeleteObadiah
Obadias
Bamako
Alabama
Right. I've got a fifth suggestion for them: Ob-la-di! Ob-la-da! Life goes on - BRA!
Their suggestions for my "misspelling" of the name "Barack" are almost as amusing:
Ba rack
Ba-rack
Barrack
Bareback
Barabbas
I just got through typing up a list of all forty-three men who have served as chief executive. Spell Check tells me that I got every name right (or, in the case of Martin Van Buren, half right) with one exception. You guessed it: "Barack Obama". The guy has been in the public eye for over five years now. He's been president for nine months! You would think they might have fixed that by now, wouldn't you?
That reminds me. Can anyone please explain to me just what the hell an "Obadias" is? It's not in Webster's Dictionary.
tomdegan@frontiernet.net
Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
Naked Truth, the MSM says a lot of stuff. A lot of that stuff they get wrong. I believe they're wrong with any speculation about the Dems picking someone else to run in 2012. It'd be suicide for the Dems if they did; it would make the party look uncertain and incompetent while alienatiing the black vote. Remember, on Friday morning the MSM was *certain* that Chicago was going to get the Olympics. Just because some talking head says something might happen don't mean it will.
ReplyDeleteTo those who say that we need to support the president, I hope you don't define support as agreeing with everything the president does. I think it's up to the people who put Obama in office to keep him honest and on track. It's our job to remind him of what got him elected in the first place. Blind praise in the face of inaction will only lead to more inaction.
One Thing,
ReplyDeleteI believe I am right about President Obama. He understands that in order to appeal to Independents and Moderates he must show a real effort to be bi-partisan. Could you imagine the criticism that he would receive if he approached his agenda selfishly? This is a man that gets criticized for eating a certain kind of mustard, for voicing an opinion on an issue involving a friend, for pursuing an opportunity to boost the economy in America, for taking his wife to New York for a date even though it was with his own money. I could go on and on but my point is that for 'some reason' our President must walk a tight rope consistently. Most everything he does is criticized and ALL on the left are not supporting him as they should. He can't afford to not try for bi-partisanship.
I like you do believe that most white people voted for Obama because they liked what they saw. But we would be foolish to think that there is not that percent that voted for him because they felt a sense of necessity. I have encountered many in that percentage. They say to me "Well, we really didn't have much choice did we with the economy and all. John McCain is a good guy but he knows nothing about the Economy. You know, in cases like this you just have to pick the lesser of two evils." And don't forget about those that voted for Obama because McCain picked that dumbwit, Sarah Palin for his V.P.
And just to give you a flip side, some white people say that blacks voted for Obama because he is black and I would say, probably in some cases but that it was mostly because he was Democrat and then black. You wouldn't get 90+% of black people voting Michael Steele for President, now wouldn't you?
Morgan, I hope you are right that the MSM is wrong about a possible Democratic Primary opposition against President Obama in 2012. But I do hope that you don't readily dismiss everything that you hear in the MSM. Because doing so could make you unprepared for real possibilities.
ReplyDeleteAnd I agree with your blind praise statement but remember that having blind faith that people will always do the right thing can sometimes lead to bitter disappointments. Never say never and never underestimate the MSM and HATE.
GOOD knocks but once but HATE leans on the doorbell until you answer.