Obama = Epic Failure - Updated Daily for your convenience!

[Chucky300]

To remove this ad, register today or login if you already are registered!

[Chucky300]

[ScottW911]

Yes, I know I just posted this in another thread but , it seems so appropriate for this one too....

[Chucky300]

HAHAHHAHAHA

GREAT!!!!!!!!

[markopolo]

Turning Point: Couric Rips Obama!

Katie Couric may be best known for her unflattering interview with Sarah Palin. But her nightly news broadcast this past Monday night may be an indicator that the big liberal media are now turning their guns on Obama.
Couric said on “CBS Evening News” that Americans are growing “disenchanted” with Obama and are openly questioning his credibility.
“Is the honeymoon over?” anchor Couric said at the beginning of her correspondent’s report.
“Although President Obama has been in office less than a year, many Americans are growing disenchanted with his handling of the enormous problems he and the country are facing, from healthcare to unemployment to Afghanistan.
“His poll numbers are sliding, and at least one poll shows his job approval rating has fallen, for the first time, below 50 percent.”
Correspondent Chris Reid chimed in: “The president is getting battered on everything from the economy to foreign policy. Some polls show Americans are increasingly questioning his credibility.”
The report asserted that while Obama talks about dealing with unemployment, which is over 10 percent and expected to rise, he has developed “no new ideas” for dealing with the problem.
CBS also cited a poll showing that only 14 percent of Americans believe Obama’s claim that healthcare reform won’t add to the budget deficit, and only 7 percent believe that the stimulus has created any jobs at all.
The report also criticized the president for being “indecisive” on Afghanistan, and for returning from his recent Asian trip “with little to show for it.”
An expert was quoted as describing his trip as the “amateur hour,” as he did not line up agreements with foreign countries before venturing abroad


Doesn't this look like another liberal falls off obama's bandwagon?

[Spartan]

Originally Posted by markopolo

Turning Point: Couric Rips Obama!

Katie Couric may be best known for her unflattering interview with Sarah Palin. But her nightly news broadcast this past Monday night may be an indicator that the big liberal media are now turning their guns on Obama.
Couric said on “CBS Evening News” that Americans are growing “disenchanted” with Obama and are openly questioning his credibility.
“Is the honeymoon over?” anchor Couric said at the beginning of her correspondent’s report.
“Although President Obama has been in office less than a year, many Americans are growing disenchanted with his handling of the enormous problems he and the country are facing, from healthcare to unemployment to Afghanistan.
“His poll numbers are sliding, and at least one poll shows his job approval rating has fallen, for the first time, below 50 percent.”
Correspondent Chris Reid chimed in: “The president is getting battered on everything from the economy to foreign policy. Some polls show Americans are increasingly questioning his credibility.”
The report asserted that while Obama talks about dealing with unemployment, which is over 10 percent and expected to rise, he has developed “no new ideas” for dealing with the problem.
CBS also cited a poll showing that only 14 percent of Americans believe Obama’s claim that healthcare reform won’t add to the budget deficit, and only 7 percent believe that the stimulus has created any jobs at all.
The report also criticized the president for being “indecisive” on Afghanistan, and for returning from his recent Asian trip “with little to show for it.”
An expert was quoted as describing his trip as the “amateur hour,” as he did not line up agreements with foreign countries before venturing abroad


Doesn't this look like another liberal falls off obama's bandwagon?

There is a tipping point where those who believed in the rhetoric will realize that they made the wrong choice. The problem with that tipping point is that it has a "magnet" effect. Meaning that it takes lot more then a normal open mind to see what is happening. "He's our guy" wont be abandoned until that guy has put the believer jobs, lifestyle and country into danger. Then they will turn on him.

[mleskovar]

I hope this isn't a repost but worth another read even if it is. Galganov, the Canadian author is obviously a conservative political activist and a strong supporter of the American way of life. Any of our Canadian members have any thoughts on him? It's a little dated but that makes it that much better IMO.

http://www.galganov.com/editorials.asp?ID=1147

[S55inPA]

here is an excellent article by Peggy Noonan from the WSJ. Noonan gave
presiden dummy a lot of leeway early on. now she is finally
taking the gloves off and seeing him for what he is....unqualified.

"He Can't Take Another Bow"

"An icon of a White House that is coming to seem amateurish"

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...111577494.html

"In a presidency, a picture or photograph becomes iconic only when it seems to express something people already think. When Gerald Ford was spoofed for being physically clumsy, it took off. The picture of Ford losing his footing and tumbling as he came down the steps of Air Force One became a symbol. There was a reason, and it wasn't that he was physically clumsy. He was not only coordinated but graceful. He'd been a football star at the University of Michigan and was offered contracts by the Detroit Lions and Green Bay Packers.

But the picture took off because it expressed the growing public view that Ford's policies were bumbling and stumbling. The picture was iconic of a growing political perception.

The Obama bowing pictures are becoming iconic, and they would not be if they weren't playing off a growing perception. If the pictures had been accompanied by headlines from Asia saying "Tough Talks Yield Big Progress" or "Obama Shows Muscle in China," the bowing pictures might be understood this way: "He Stoops to Conquer: Canny Obama shows elaborate deference while he subtly, toughly, quietly advances his nation's interests."

But that's not how the pictures were received or will be remembered.

It is true that Mr. Obama often seems not to have a firm grasp of—or respect for—protocol, of what has been done before and why, and of what divergence from the traditional might imply. And it is true that his political timing was unfortunate. When a great nation is feeling confident and strong, a surprising presidential bow might seem gracious. When it is feeling anxious, a bow will seem obsequious.

The Obama bowing pictures are becoming iconic not for those reasons, however, but because they express a growing political perception, and that is that there is something amateurish about this presidency, something too ad hoc and highly personalized about it, something . . . incompetent, at least in its first year.

It is hard to be president, and White Houses under pressure take refuge in thoughts that become mantras. When the previous White House came under mounting criticism from 2005 through '08, they comforted themselves by thinking, They criticized Lincoln, too. You could see their minds whirring: Lincoln was criticized, Lincoln was great, ergo we are great. But of course just because they say you're stupid doesn't mean you're Lincoln.

One senses the Obama people are doing the Lincoln too, and adding to it the consoling thought that this is only the first year, we've got three years to go, we can change perceptions, don't worry.

But they should worry. You can get tagged, typed and pegged your first year. Gerald Ford did, and Ronald Reagan too, more happily. The first year is when indelible impressions are made and iconic photos emerge

[Kaz]

Pelosicare/Obamacare might cost upto $6 trillion, not $900 billion

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/...op-6-trillion/

[Eldritch]

I was behind a woman driving a PT Cruiser (there's her first problem right there). On her rear bumper were three stickers:

Vote Democrat

Hillary for President 2008

Hope and Change - Obama '08


I had to laugh.

[S55inPA]

you know you are a complete liberal failure when michael moore
threatens to abandon you.

An Open Letter To The President From Michael Moore

http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/mi...-michael-moore

[Eldritch]

Originally Posted by S55inPA

you know you are a complete liberal failure when michael moore
threatens to abandon you.

An Open Letter To The President From Michael Moore

http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/mi...-michael-moore

Dang, you must have linked to that via hotair.

[Chucky300]

Originally Posted by S55inPA

you know you are a complete liberal failure when michael moore
threatens to abandon you.

An Open Letter To The President From Michael Moore

http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/mi...-michael-moore

I especially like this:

So now you feel backed into a corner. 30 years ago this past Thursday (Thanksgiving) the Soviet generals had a cool idea -- "Let's invade Afghanistan!" Well, that turned out to be the final nail in the USSR coffin.

That stupid cheese brain of a liberal is not only FACTUALLY incorrect - but demonstrates how stupid liberals like to re-write history to suit their own agenda.

Moron did not object to Obama calling the war in Afghanistan as a war of need....while bashing the war in iraq as the "bad war".

Call me evil - but I hope Moore gets killed by a stray bullet. Why? Because he is trying to promote himself on the deaths of our troops. He doesn't give a crap about what he is saying - just wants to further his DVD Sales. This letter to the President is entirely based on the fact that he knows readers like us will read it - talk about it - create a buzz - which will no doubt translate into sales. I hope the bullet gets lodged in his body cavity and it is one slow slow painful death.

And folks....I hope the doctors in that room say the same thing they did to Reagan when he was shot.... "Today - we are ALL REPUBLICANS!"

[S55inPA]

Moore isn't the only one abandoning president dummy.
even the Arabs see him for what he really is.....weak.
......an excellent read.


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...500152682.html

"The Arabs Have Stopped Applauding Obama"

"A foreign policy of penance has won America no friends."

By FOUAD AJAMI

'He talks too much," a Saudi academic in Jeddah, who had once been smitten with Barack Obama, recently observed to me of America's 44th president. He has wearied of Mr. Obama and now does not bother with the Obama oratory.

He is hardly alone, this academic. In the endless chatter of this region, and in the commentaries offered by the press, the theme is one of disappointment. In the Arab-Islamic world, Barack Obama has come down to earth.

He has not made the world anew, history did not bend to his will, the Indians and Pakistanis have been told that the matter of Kashmir is theirs to resolve, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the same intractable clash of two irreconcilable nationalisms, and the theocrats in Iran have not "unclenched their fist," nor have they abandoned their nuclear quest.

There is little Mr. Obama can do about this disenchantment. He can't journey to Turkey to tell its Islamist leaders and political class that a decade of anti-American scapegoating is all forgiven and was the product of American policies—he has already done that. He can't journey to Cairo to tell the fabled "Arab street" that the Iraq war was a wasted war of choice, and that America earned the malice that came its way from Arab lands—he has already done that as well. He can't tell Muslims that America is not at war with Islam—he, like his predecessor, has said that time and again.

It was the norm for American liberalism during the Bush years to brandish the Pew Global Attitudes survey that told of America's decline in the eyes of foreign nations. Foreigners were saying what the liberals wanted said.

Now those surveys of 2009 bring findings from the world of Islam that confirm that the animus toward America has not been radically changed by the ascendancy of Mr. Obama. In the Palestinian territories, 15% have a favorable view of the U.S. while 82% have an unfavorable view. The Obama speech in Ankara didn't seem to help in Turkey, where the favorables are 14% and those unreconciled, 69%. In Egypt, a country that's reaped nearly 40 years of American aid, things stayed roughly the same: 27% have a favorable view of the U.S. while 70% do not. In Pakistan, a place of great consequence for American power, our standing has deteriorated: The unfavorables rose from 63% in 2008 to 68% this year.

Mr. Obama's election has not drained the swamps of anti-Americanism. That anti-Americanism is endemic to this region, an alibi and a scapegoat for nations, and their rulers, unwilling to break out of the grip of political autocracy and economic failure. It predated the presidency of George W. Bush and rages on during the Obama presidency.

We had once taken to the foreign world that quintessential American difference—the belief in liberty, a needed innocence to play off against the settled and complacent ways of older nations. The Obama approach is different.

Steeped in an overarching idea of American guilt, Mr. Obama and his lieutenants offered nothing less than a doctrine, and a policy, of American penance. No one told Mr. Obama that the Islamic world, where American power is engaged and so dangerously exposed, it is considered bad form, nay a great moral lapse, to speak ill of one's own tribe when in the midst, and in the lands, of others.

The crowd may have applauded the cavalier way the new steward of American power referred to his predecessor, but in the privacy of their own language they doubtless wondered about his character and his fidelity. "My brother and I against my cousin, my cousin and I against the stranger," goes one of the Arab world's most honored maxims. The stranger who came into their midst and spoke badly of his own was destined to become an object of suspicion.

Mr. Obama could not make up his mind: He was at one with "the people" and with the rulers who held them in subjugation. The people of Iran who took to the streets this past summer were betrayed by this hapless diplomacy—Mr. Obama was out to "engage" the terrible rulers that millions of Iranians were determined to be rid of.

On Nov. 4, on the 30th anniversary of the seizure of the American embassy in Tehran, the embattled reformers, again in the streets, posed an embarrassing dilemma for American diplomacy: "Obama, Obama, you are either with us or with them," they chanted. By not responding to these cries and continuing to "engage" Tehran's murderous regime, his choice was made clear. It wasn't one of American diplomacy's finest moments.

Mr. Obama has himself to blame for the disarray of his foreign policy. American arms had won a decent outcome in Iraq, but Mr. Obama would not claim it—it was his predecessor's war. Vigilance had kept the American homeland safe from terrorist attacks for seven long years under his predecessors, but he could never grant Bush policies the honor and credit they deserved. He had declared Afghanistan a war of necessity, but he seems to have his eye on the road out even as he is set to announce a troop increase in an address to be delivered tomorrow.

He was quick to assert, in the course of his exuberant campaign for president last year, that his diplomacy in South Asia would start with the standoff in Kashmir. In truth India had no interest in an international adjudication of Kashmir. What was settled during the partition in 1947 was there to stay. In recent days, Mr. Obama walked away from earlier ambitions. "Obviously, there are historic conflicts between India and Pakistan," he said. "It's not the place of the United States to try to, from the outside, resolve those conflicts."

Nor was he swayed by the fate of so many "peace plans" that have been floated over so many decades to resolve the fight between Arab and Jew over the land between the River Jordan and the Mediterranean. Where George W. Bush offered the Palestinians the gift of clarity—statehood but only after the renunciation of terror and the break with maximalism—Mr. Obama signaled a return to the dead ways of the past: a peace process where America itself is broker and arbiter.

The Obama diplomacy had made a settlement freeze its starting point, when this was precisely the wrong place to begin. Israel has given up settlements before at the altar of peace—recall the historical accommodation with Egypt a quarter century ago. The right course would have set the question of settlements aside as it took up the broader challenge of radicalism in the region—the menace and swagger of Iran, the arsenal of Hamas and Hezbollah, the refusal of the Arab order of power to embrace in broad daylight the cause of peace with Israel.

The laws of gravity, the weight of history and of precedent, have caught up with the Obama presidency. We are beyond stirring speeches. The novelty of the Obama approach, and the Obama persona, has worn off. There is a whole American diplomatic tradition to draw upon—engagements made, wisdom acquired in the course of decades, and, yes, accounts to be settled with rogues and tyrannies. They might yet help this administration find its way out of a labyrinth of its own making.

Mr. Ajami, a professor at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies and a senior fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution, is the author of "The Foreigner's Gift" (Free Press, 2007).

[S55inPA]

Originally Posted by Chucky300

I especially like this:



That stupid cheese brain of a liberal is not only FACTUALLY incorrect - but demonstrates how stupid liberals like to re-write history to suit their own agenda.

Moron did not object to Obama calling the war in Afghanistan as a war of need....while bashing the war in iraq as the "bad war".

Call me evil - but I hope Moore gets killed by a stray bullet. Why? Because he is trying to promote himself on the deaths of our troops. He doesn't give a crap about what he is saying - just wants to further his DVD Sales. This letter to the President is entirely based on the fact that he knows readers like us will read it - talk about it - create a buzz - which will no doubt translate into sales. I hope the bullet gets lodged in his body cavity and it is one slow slow painful death.

And folks....I hope the doctors in that room say the same thing they did to Reagan when he was shot.... "Today - we are ALL REPUBLICANS!"

the left is truly insane.

[Kaz]

lol well said Chucky, I love how Reagan maintained his sense of humor even after being shot and asking the surgeons 'Please tell me you guys are Republicans' lol!!

as for Moore's real life record, check out his hometown and neighboring towns in MI that were influenced by his teachings. Detroit is practically a ghost town, so sad.

[audi_guy]

http://video.foxnews.com/#/12100042/...9d70b0c12f2749


sigh.... when is this going to end

[bigben320e]

Originally Posted by audi_guy

http://video.foxnews.com/#/12100042/...9d70b0c12f2749


sigh.... when is this going to end

Take a full read on the story: http://www.boston.com/news/local/mas...nts/?page=full

Tell me about it. Here are some more snippets on this guy:

* More Harvard than Summers? The Big Picture's Marion Maneker points out, reviewing the Globe story, that "the real fault lies with the school's leadership after Summers resigned." Summers may have been a bit "aggressive" with the cash, but the university kept with the risky investment strategy long after Summers had left.

* Actually, Harvard Came Out Ahead Responding to Felix Salmon, economist Brad DeLong crunches some numbers and figures out that Harvard got a 21% return on its investments between 2001 and 2007, suggesting that Summers may not have been as criminally negligent as some might think.

* No, It Didn't Former Goldman Sachs employee Yves Smith dismisses this notion, pointing out that Harvard might not have "committed to a long-term building program," among other expenses, had it been investing "more conservatively." The current budget cuts due to the losses, she says, "are large and wide-ranging," with no more hot breakfasts in the undergraduate dining halls. She's also none too impressed with those blaming Harvard at large for the losses, rather than Summers.

* Fantastic--This Is the Guy Running Our Economy Whether Harvard adequately re-strategized after Summers's departure isn't the relevant matter to most. Glenn Reynolds succinctly articulates the blogging world's general discomfort at the Globe story: "But don't worry, now Larry Summers is playing with your money."

[Eldritch]

Interesting news:

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/17303

[markopolo]

Originally Posted by Mister Brenton

Interesting news:

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/17303

Treason!
How effin nice!
I wonder if those charges will stick. They will do everything and anything to discredit Commander Fitzpatrick.

obama - community organizer with great experience and Chicago roots. "Great American".

If George Bush (or any other President) did 1/100 of all the things obama is doing...

[MG]

JFC, This assbag is going to read from his teleprompter on TV tonight? He killed one of my favorite shows tonight! That leaves me with either The Goonies or Beverly Hills Chihuahua

[S55inPA]

president dummy trying to have it both ways.
the world is onto this phony.

"Searching in Vain for the Obama Magic"
By Gabor Steingart

Never before has a speech by President Barack Obama felt as false as his Tuesday address announcing America's new strategy for Afghanistan. It seemed like a campaign speech combined with Bush rhetoric -- and left both dreamers and realists feeling distraught.

One can hardly blame the West Point leadership. The academy commanders did their best to ensure that Commander-in-Chief Barack Obama's speech would be well-received.

Just minutes before the president took the stage inside Eisenhower Hall, the gathered cadets were asked to respond "enthusiastically" to the speech. But it didn't help: The soldiers' reception was cool.

One didn't have to be a cadet on Tuesday to feel a bit of nausea upon hearing Obama's speech. It was the least truthful address that he has ever held. He spoke of responsibility, but almost every sentence smelled of party tactics. He demanded sacrifice, but he was unable to say what it was for exactly.

An additional 30,000 US soldiers are to march into Afghanistan -- and then they will march right back out again. America is going to war -- and from there it will continue ahead to peace. It was the speech of a Nobel War Prize laureate.

Just in Time for the Campaign

For each troop movement, Obama had a number to match. US strength in Afghanistan will be tripled relative to the Bush years, a fact that is sure to impress hawks in America. But just 18 months later, just in time for Obama's re-election campaign, the horror of war is to end and the draw down will begin. The doves of peace will be let free.

The speech continued in that vein. It was as though Obama had taken one of his old campaign speeches and merged it with a text from the library of ex-President George W. Bush. Extremists kill in the name of Islam, he said, before adding that it is one of the "world's great religions." He promised that responsibility for the country's security would soon be transferred to the government of President Hamid Karzai -- a government which he said was "corrupt." The Taliban is dangerous and growing stronger. But "America will have to show our strength in the way that we end wars," he added.

It was a dizzying combination of surge and withdrawal, of marching to and fro. The fast pace was reminiscent of plays about the French revolution: Troops enter from the right to loud cannon fire and then they exit to the left. And at the end, the dead are left on stage.

Obama's Magic No Longer Works

But in this case, the public was more disturbed than entertained. Indeed, one could see the phenomenon in a number of places in recent weeks: Obama's magic no longer works. The allure of his words has grown weaker.

It is not he himself who has changed, but rather the benchmark used to evaluate him. For a president, the unit of measurement is real life. A leader is seen by citizens through the prism of their lives -- their job, their household budget, where they live and suffer. And, in the case of the war on terror, where they sometimes die.

Political dreams and yearnings for the future belong elsewhere. That was where the political charmer Obama was able to successfully capture the imaginations of millions of voters. It is a place where campaigners -- particularly those with a talent for oration -- are fond of taking refuge. It is also where Obama set up his campaign headquarters, in an enormous tent called "Hope."

In his speech on America's new Afghanistan strategy, Obama tried to speak to both places. It was two speeches in one. That is why it felt so false. Both dreamers and realists were left feeling distraught.

The American president doesn't need any opponents at the moment. He's already got himself

[Chucky300]

Did anyone catch Chris Matthews afterwards? I did not watch it live - but saw it on one of the conservative sites. (No, Im not a closet liberal)

He had the balls to say that Obama walked into the "ENEMY CAMP" by going to west point because the cadets did not look quite as sucking up.

Wow...So now unless your lips are firmly glued to the back of Heir Director's arse....we are enemy territory?

eeesh

[revstriker]

Saw the speech on TV. First, even before hearing any reaction, I was amazed at how long the speech went on, and just how little detail it contained. I guess I thought with the amount of time he took to come to his 30,000 troop number, he would somehow justify it. Especially knowing the the left in his party are against it. I also thought that the speech, to a room full of West Point Cadets who could soon be putting their asses on the line in Afghanistan, would be more motivating. Something with a "We Will Win" type of a theme.

My wife and I noticed the less than enthusiastic response from the audience. It was really just polite applause. We also noticed more than a few sleepy looking cadets in the audience. Even one of the generals in the audience appeared to be fighting the urge to doze off.

While I support Obama's decision to send more troops (although I would have preferred that he send what his general asked for), I did not get the impression that he stood in support of those troops. I suspect that this speech will do little to help improve soldier morale.

[chiphomme]

Watch Karl Rove shred Matt Lauer. Can the MSM bias be more obvious? Lauer had a set line of questions to attack the Bush administration when he should be concentrating on Obama. It's funny watching Rove slap him down.



http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26184891...19431#34219431