"If there's one thing that I regret this year is that we were so busy just getting stuff done and dealing with the immediate crises that were in front of us that I think we lost some of that sense of speaking directly to the American people about what their core values are and why we have to make sure those institutions are matching up with those values."Translation: President Obama will be...
- Singing about health control on American Idol!
- Straightening out Jack Bauer on 24!
- Keeping Les Stroud company by talking, and talking, and talking, and talking on Survivorman!
- Getting in touch with the core values of Ben and Jacob on Lost!
- Bumping both Jay Leno and Conan O'Brien — until every last living, breathing, voting American sees things The Obama Way!
Posts
33 comments:
Speaking to (or actually telling) ...not asking what their core values are. That about sums it up IMHO. Why would anyone not feel all warm and fuzzy?
So, wait...he thinks the reason nobody likes him anymore is that they felt "remote" and "detached" from what the policies he was creating?
It couldn't possibly be that they felt he made HUGE mistakes in creating those policies?
This man is dense.
Sorry, the "what" should not be in there...
Big difference between speaking to and speaking with.
And blaming Bush for all his problems.
Since the progressives think most of the public is to stupid to have their own opinion, they'll just tell us what we should think.
Dan, I know you meant this as humor, but I've not felt like chuckling for just about a year now.
Blood. Boiling.
Really. What has this man "done" other than add a trillion dollars to our debt, raise unemployment levels, treat terrorists like citizens and citizens like terrorists??
"Big difference between speaking to and speaking with.
....or.....
listening.
But another quote from this interview tells us why that's not really what he cares about.
"I think the assumption was if I just focus on policy, if I just focus on this provision or that law or if we're making a good rational decision here, then people will get it."
It's the "I'm sorry I'm too fast thinking and brilliant and you're too stupid to understand my vision, or anything else" apology.
He sounds like he's not going to budge like Clinton. He's doubling down.
Bring it on.
Sounds like a job interview.
You know the kind...
"If I have one fault it's that I work too hard. I guess I sometimes forget that my wife and kids are more important and that my co-workers have a life outside of work. Yes sir, that's my biggest weakness, I'm just too hard a worker."
BLEH!
And today Congress wants to raise the debt ceiling another $1.9 trillion dollars.
"If I want your opinion, I'll give it to you."
Translation: I've decided to double down on stupid.
Hmm. If the problem is that he's "too busy getting stuff done," then I propose that he take a break. Give himself some time. Say, three years. I think a 3-year break of getting in touch with the American Republic could do us some good. he could speak to us, but not worry about getting "stuff done." Then at least we can give this spending nightmare a break.
Preach it, bro.
Maybe lock himself in a room with nothing but a Bible and a Constitution?
I wish I could comment.
I have sharp readers. This is not breaking news.
What you are seeing is both the heart of liberalism, and the towering arrogance that is Obama.
Here's the terrific irony. The election of Brown could be the best thing that ever happened to 0, like the Republican "takeover" was the best thing that happened to The Nameless One (TNO). In the case of TNO, the GOP congress drove him back towards the center... which set him up for two "successful" terms, little credit to him.
If a resurgent GOP drove 0 to the center, it could have the same effect on his administration.
However, that doesn't account for the towering arrogance that is 0bama. He is, after all, the one we've all been waiting for. He is the one. He's Cap'n Hope-n-change. People attribute Messianic qualities to him, and he accepts them.
So he may indeed double-down on stupid, and thus undo himself.
Sometimes irony is... well, you know.
I tell you what confuses me more than Obama: The American Public.
See, we once elected a goveror here in Alabama whose entire platform for running was to bring in the Lottery. You know, for education!! Well, he got elected. He brought the Lottery for a vote before the people as required by the State Constitution....and it failed miserably.
I was like...whaaa.... How does that happen? Here we have a President who got elected for change. You know, healthcare and stuff like that. Now, even though I disagree with him. I lost. My team lost. I expected that, you know, we'd lose on the policies he was pushing because that's how he got elected.
So now we have a President who is, shocker, trying to do exactly what he said he would and he can't. And the people are rebelling against him who put him there. Not us, mind you, we've been grousing since the beginning.
I just don't get it, Dan. I really don't. I don't think that this is a case of Obama being arrogant. He assumes, I guess, that the things that got him elected are the things the folks who voted for him want. The problem, it seems to me, is that the people who voted for him are fair weather friends who talk but don't show up for game day.
Obviously, demoncracy is a failure. Bring in the King!!
Whoa....I didn't mean to put demoncracy. That was a pure accident. I actually meant to type democracy. Spooky.
EGAD!! My word verification is:
deckjp
Who is jp, and why should I deck him?
You have a point, Brad. Not kidding: I've had in back of my mind to write a post titled something like "Sympathy for Obama" (which may remind older readers of a Stones song). He ran on A, was elected for A, tries to do A - and everyone's like, "Wait - what?? No!"
I experienced that as a pastor. Have you? "I'm going to preach the Bible," you say. "Yay!" they say. "Be our pastor." You preach the Bible. "Wait - what are you doing??"
*uncomfortable collar stretching*
Yeah...heheh...that happened to me one time recently. I resigned. Gloriously. :)
The problem is that everyone seemed to make the "change" part mean what they wanted it to. Many who supported him could not articulate accurately where he stood on specific issues. The exit interviews that John Ziegler did for his documentary captured this moment in time like nothing else could.
But he also ran on B, C, D, and E, hasn't done any of it, and in fact has gone the opposite direction.
What happened to transparency and most ethical administration? We got closed doors and crooks in the Cabinet. What happened to all legislation being posted for 3 days/1 day/1 hour/3.5 seconds for all to read before a vote? Reducing earmarks? Not increasing the debt? I don't have to go on. I'm preaching to the choir.
The guy promised some things that sounded tantalizing, but I think the only thing he really meant was the part about fundamentally changing America. And now he promises to do a better job of telling us how brilliant his ideas are and how dumb we are not to get it. Somehow I don't think he will break that promise either.
Yeah...also you didn't mention the part in the interview where he basically said that Browns victory was BUSHES FAULT!
Lol.
"Here's my assessment of not just the vote in Massachusetts, but the mood around the country: the same thing that swept Scott Brown into office swept me into office," the president said in an exclusive interview with ABC News' George Stephanopoulos. "People are angry and they are frustrated. Not just because of what's happened in the last year or two years, but what's happened over the last eight years."
"The last eight years"= "all the suffering we have right now (Browns election included) is due to what GWB has subjected us to and the fallout from that."
Somebody throw me a rope here. I just cannot imagine trying to be an elected leader. It seems impossible. The Lord God could not keep His people from grumbling when He delivered them from slavery! How on earth do you govern such a people? Try to please the carnal? That means awful compromise. Try to lead despite their whining? Well, you will just be their whipping boy.
We are an insufferable people.
@Dan:
"Sympathy for Obama"
"(Not so) Pleased to meet you!"
ROFL - glad I wasn't drinking my coffee at the moment!
(Guess this means that I'm one of your older readers!)
=;^P
DJP: The election of Brown could be the best thing that ever happened to 0, like the Republican "takeover" was the best thing that happened to The Nameless One (TNO).
The election of Brown was the best thing for the country because it stopped Obamacare.
If this moves Obama to the center and it is the best thing for President Obama, I'm afraid it will still be the worst thing for the country. If, and that's a big if, Obama betrays his supporters and abandons his socialism and gets out of the way letting the market correct itself and puts incentives to create more jobs and moves to the center, and the economy improves, then he will get re-elected in 2012. That means four more years of him appointing judges to the judiciary. That will do more damage than Obamacare could ever do (and Obamacare would have done terrible damage). Justice Stevens, it appears, is already set to retire at the end of this term. Ginsburg is not far behind. Obama will have appointed 3 Supreme Court justices and that's just for his first term!!
I actually think President Obama is more committed to his socialism than Clinton was. Obama, I think, really believes in his liberalism. I find it hard to believe he would just abandon it. If he doesn't abandon it and stays true to his principles, like Carter did, the economy will continue to plummet and voters will drop him like a hot potato.
If he is not principled, and abandons his liberalism to stay in office, and moves to the center, the economy improves (well, the economy is always cyclical, it goes up and it goes down, all Obama has to do is not make things worse).
That I believe is the irony - which is, if the Republicans succeed in moving him to the center, he wins another election and appoints more liberal judges. Can you say, homosexual marriage?
He ran on A, was elected for A, tries to do A - and everyone's like, "Wait - what?? No!"
And that's where the American people need to man and woman up and admit that the "not listening" thing was working both ways. A whole lot of folks heard him verbalize a lot of things, and spent precisely zero time critically listening and asking questions. What is he really saying? What has he done in the past to either support or reject that he'll do what he says? Wait a minute!!! He's saying "A" but what he means is "never in a million years A!"
The MSM enabled this ignorance, but that too is the people's fault for taking so long to figure it out.
Yet another reason to keep my kids far away from the American public school system where kids are force-fed government-blessed "facts", rather than taught to think and reason based on the only ideological framework that is guaranteed solid for eternity - God's.
I experienced that as a pastor. Have you? "I'm going to preach the Bible," you say. "Yay!" they say. "Be our pastor." You preach the Bible. "Wait - what are you doing??"
Dan I experienced that same thing and watched families leave one by one until no one was left but my own. All because I said I was going to preach the Bible... and did.
Yep. As if they said, "Sure, right, of course Reverend, everyone says that! Gotcha!"
Then....
"Wait -- you didn't mean all that about the Bible, did you?"
milympaWhat kills me is all the crying from the left. "Oh no! The Republicans have 41 Senators! The Obama agenda is dead!"
What? This is the first President to have a super majority since... a really long time... and yet each one of those Presidents got things accomplished. This guy had one defining bill - Health Care. And it was gutted with 60 of his Senators and is now DEAD with 59. Isn't he supposed to be the sharpest knife in the drawer?
Apparently the great unifier of America needs 80 Senators and 400 Congressmen in order to get his agenda passed. Pathetic.
al sends
Al,
That's kind of a devasting point.
I'm still sad that we wussed out on Social Security reform under President Bush. If he had 60 Senators we may have had a chance there.
If anyone thinks BHO and the far left are just going to wither away, die and give up, sorry. Instead, they'll only intensify their efforts and probably even become more underhanded. They really don't care about public opinion. They're intent on flying the plane straight into the ground so they can remake society according to their perverse utopian ideals.
Interesting my word verification for this comment was "depike."
Well, if you take Biblical prophecy seriously, then you know that one day there will be an Obamalike figure who will actually succeed in many of the things that 0 is finding harder to attain.
And I do take biblical prophecy seriously. That drives my amillennial friends nuts, but I'm good at driving people nuts.
Post a Comment