Andrew Malcolm in the LATimes on Obama’s audible on a press conference:
Here’s the scary thing for the new White House: the terrifying words “Jimmy Carter” have started appearing in print and on the air, recalling the ex-Georgia governor’s ineptness and…….apparent powerlessness in handling his Iranian (hostage) issues in the late 1970s. That impression lead to 12 years of Reagan-Bush Republican White Houses.
Which has got to scare the Administration.
Of course, Obama can still salvage this one; quite easily, in fact, if he recognizes (unlikely as this is) that the Mullahs are not dealing with him in good faith, and that all of his olive branches (which every Administration since Reagan has presented them, by the way) are being used for basiji riot batons.
Is Obama so committed to the notion of repudiating Bush’s Wilsonian doctrine that he’ll ignore the fact that stoking emnity with the US helps keep the mullahs in power? And that he’s no less a target for this enmity than Bush or Reagan were?
On the one hand – is Obama “committed” to anything?
On the other – Obama has built his entire foreign policy (to the extent that he has one at all) on the ideal that terrorist theocrat thugs are people too, and deserve just as much respect as the British Parliament.
You far-right nuts are making all kinds of noise cause President Obama is doing exactly what a mature leader, sensible of American interests, would do. He’s not backing either of the snakes in the Iranian election. No doubt your favoritest president ever, George W. Bush, woulda said something tough about smokin’ ’em out. Then followed up by demonstrating nothing more than his complete impotence in foreign policy.
By the way, those “olive branches” that Reagan was handing out were actually guns, intended for “moderate” Iranians, if you remember. That was a little escapade called “Iran-Contra.” Is that the kind of tough action you’re looking for from President Obama?
If not, exactly what is it you’d like him to do that he’s not doing? Or is this just more rooting for American failure from your side?
Affirmative Action is tolerable if you’re filling a Diversity Outreach Coordinator whose only function is to give a good speech while wearing a nice suit. The employee doesn’t have to know anything, doesn’t have to be able to do anything, aside from read the teleprompter.
Affirmative Action doesn’t work well when you’re filling the job of Leader. Leader of anything – leader of a platoon, leader of the Cub Scout pack, leader of the sales and service division, Leader of the Free World.
What’s happening is not due to Obama’s vision or commitment. He has neither. He reads well wearing a nice suit; that’s it.
What’s happening is due to the vision and commitment of those running his government while he’s reading aloud, people like Emmanual and Axelrod, et al.
You’re letting Zaphod’s antics pull your eye off the ball.
.
By the way, those “olive branches” that Reagan was handing out were actually guns, intended for “moderate” Iranians, if you remember.
Take your head out of the Colbert Report. He also tried old-fashioned over-the-table diplomacy. Didn’t work.
And so exactly what, Mitch? What would you have President Obama do that he is not doing, regarding Iran?
Good point, Nate. Obama’s an affirmative action president cause he’s a black guy – and therefore not as good as a white guy would be. He had to have gotten that job through affirmative action. Not by kicking the electoral shit out of McCain and Palin.
Hahahahaha! Christ on a cracker, you are stupid.
Well the folks in Oneota NY are already suggesting impeachment for The One.
http://www.thedailystar.com/opinion/local_story_174034512.html
Sorry Oneonta NY
What would you have President Obama do that he is not doing, regarding Iran?
For starters, pull his head out and realize that the mullahs have no intention of reasoning with him in good faith (as “mature leaders” as we’d see it). He is what every American president will be to the mullahs; an enemy to dangle in front of the people, albeit a more docile, tamer, malleable one than the last one.
And throwing a little moral weight behind the protesters wouldn’t hurt. Posturing? Sure. Like everything else in Obama’s Iran (and foreign) policy. But posturing is sometimes what a president is supposed to do.
That, and send in those teams of ninja snipers Bush was supposedly training to send after dissidents and journalists. That’d be cool.
“The folks in Oneonta,” eh Kel? More like some accounting prof at Hartwick College. But hey, Oneonta is the gateway to Syracuse. I sense a popular uprising!
What would you have President Obama do that he is not doing, regarding Iran?
Ooh! Ooh!
Invite Khameini and Ahmadinejad out for burgers with all his media pals!
“More like some accounting prof at Hartwick College.”
Distinction without a difference clown – try harder next time.
“a more docile, tamer, malleable one”
Not to mention a smarter, more competent, less stupid one. One who can eat a pretzel without losing consciousness. One who knows how to read and stuff.
So it sounds like you have nothing concrete you’d like President Obama to do. You just want to vent a little. No problem. Let it all out. It’s frustrating to be on the political sidelines, isn’t it little fella?
angryclown said:
“Or is this just more rooting for American failure from your side?”
American failure? Posting helpful advice like:
“Instead of emulating the miserable failure Jimmy Carter in certain facets of your presidency, it would be a better idea to use the better parts of Ronald Reagan as a template instead”
is promoting American failure? No.
It is trying to avert American failure by trying to avoid a Democrat failing. Sometimes, I think you want to fail.
Really, Kel. You kind of imply that the town of Oneonta is up in arms, demanding the impeachment of President Obama. Instead, it’s some accounting teacher at a third-rate college. As your hero once said, “facts are stupid things,” eh Kel?
Pingback: UrbanGrounds » Blog Archive » B. Hussein Obama on Iran: Take Two
What the heck did Clownie pour on his cornflakes this morning?
> What would you have President Obama do that he is not doing, regarding Iran?
It’s not that complicated, you get the people in the room and do the deal. Knock heads. Get ‘er done.
Iran’s Council of Clerics will respect us for it.
/jc
No, Clown, he’s an Affirmative Action hire because his sole qualifications for the job consist of being a Black man who reads well from a teleprompter and looks great in a suit.
No other politician in America could be elected President with a resume as thin as his – they couldn’t even get nominated. He got the nod because of his race, pure and simple.
But you go right on believing that he is The One as the country crumbles around us. Whatever makes your little clown heart smile.
.
Whatever makes your little clown heart smile
That just shows how little you know the Clown.
He’s the “crying on the inside” type.
Which is why he’s a Democrat.
To: Leonard “Slash” Slaschbein
From: Ginger Assad, Human Resources, Comedy Central
Re: Audition Tapes
Mr. Slaschbein,
As noted in our 79 previous communications on this subject, and for the last time, The Colbert Report isn’t hiring at all, much less to replace Mr. Colbert.
Furthermore, your assertion that “Colbert is a punk” notwithstanding, Stephen Colbert is the most successful fake talk show host in the business today.
Please cease and desist sending audition tapes.
Our attorneys will be seeing to this matter should your entreaties – which some might call “harassment” – continue.
Thank you,
Comedy Central Human Resources.
smarter, more competent, less stupid one
The jury is still very much out on that in re Iran. I believe it was your clown mentor Howard Zinn who advised “You never count your money when you’re sitting at the table. There’ll be time enough for counting when the dealing’s done”.
The mullahs so far are playing him like a saxophone.
Well we could always hope that someone who’s “smarter” is also “less stupid”. Somehow I think Great Leader will try to play both sides, being the consumate politician that He is.
While by contrast, George W. Shrub, the legacy president, was qualified, eh Nate? It’s a little early yet, but Angryclown has to consider you in the lead for 2009 Racist Douchebag of the Year.
Oh, and by “the nod” you mean 69.5 million votes and twice the number of electoral votes as his opponent. At a time we were involved in two wars and the economy was cratering. Obama got *that* nod “because of his race, pure and simple.”
You, my friend, are a genuine shithead.
Any of you wingnuts want to step up and agree with nate’s statement that “He got the nod because of his race, pure and simple”? Cause there’s plenty of ridicule to go around if you want some!
I guess Nate must be a racist because angryclown believes race could not have anything to do with Barack Obama being elected POTUS.
“With his inauguration as President of the United States, Obama became the first African American to hold the office …”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_2009_presidential_inauguration
‘”You could tell that’s a black president from the way he was moving,” comedian Jamie Foxx joked following the dance.’
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27721638/
“Yesterday was a historic day. On January 20th, 2009, Barack H. Obama was sworn in as the 44th President of the United States of America – the first African-American ever to hold the office of U.S. Commander-in-Chief.”
http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/01/the_inauguration_of_president.html
“… a man whose father less than 60 years ago might not have been served at a local restaurant can now stand before you to take a most sacred oath.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/20/us/politics/20text-obama.html?pagewanted=3
Yeah, only a racist would even mention it. Unfortunately, it seems that our media is full of racists. Either that, or angryclown is race baiting “Douchebag of the Year”.
No, AC, you can’t get around the truth by name-calling. And it matters not a whit if the others here choose to avoid getting involved in disabusing you of your dementia.
Barak Obama is an Affirmative Action hire and that’s all there is to it.
Calling me a racist isn’t much of a rebuttal of my argument, it’s just an attack on my person. A big-shot lawyer like you surely knows the Latin phrase for that tactic so I won’t bother to spell it, just mention it in passing.
If I were a racist, I would vote against a Black man simply because he’s Black. On the contrary, I’d jump at the chance to vote for somebody like Clarence Thomas, Walter Williams, Thomas Sowell, Cal Darden, John Thompson at Symantec or Ken Chenault. Hell, I’d vote for Bill Cosby – he’s a PhD and has been a successful businessman my whole life as well as an outspoken leader in the struggle to re-establish high standards in the Black community.
In contrast to Barak Obama, who has checked off the boxes in each of his sinecures on the way up.
Winning against Bush (who wasn’t even running) with the full throated assistance of the major media isn’t the stunning accomplishment you might think. Hillary Clinton was a lock to win the nomination until The One came on the scene. He got the nod (for the nomination, not the election, read my paragraph again) not because anybody in the Democrat party could articulate his superior policy platform, but because Black trumps Woman in affirmative action rankings and Democrats are all about victimhood.
And now that you mention it, yes, I would agree that Bush was a more qualified candidate than Obama. Aside from being able to prove he actually was born in the United States – which Obama carefully declines to do – Bush served as Chief Executive of one of our largest states before running for Chief Executive of All the States. Executive experience is exactly what Obama is lacking and it clearly shows in his fumbling attempts to hire tax cheats and lobbyists to fill top jobs; abruptly and probably illegally firing Inspectors General who are investigating his friends . . . you read the papers, you know the examples as well as I.
The difference is that I’m not willing to excuse incompetence because of the race of the incompetent, but you are. Which only goes to prove my point: Obama is an Affirmative Action hire. And you know it. You’re just ashamed to admit it.
.
Once again, Angryclown asks if any of you wingnuts are willing to say you agree with nate’s statement that President Obama “got the nod because of his race, pure and simple”? Or that “Barak Obama is an Affirmative Action hire and that’s all there is to it.”
Dang, accidentally omitted from my list JC Watts, Alan Keyes and Condi Rice (technically not a Black man, but WAY more qualified than The One).
.
Having already trotted out the race card to no effect, now you resort to social opprobrium to stifle me?
I guess I stand alone. Not a bad place to be, if all else think the earth is flat, that illness is caused by humours and global warming by SUVs, that the emperor has nice clothes and that Obama did not receive the Democrat nominiation because of Affirmative Action.
.
Clownie challenged “Any of you wingnuts want to step up and agree with nate’s statement that “He got the nod because of his race, pure and simple”? ”
Do you want to assert that it wasn’t a factor?
*I* see, now you claim he got the *Democratic nomination* because of affirmative action. Not that he got 53 percent of the vote – a comfortable margin over the qualified, non-affirmative action candidate – because of affirmative action.
You stand alone. You backpedal alone.
You want to answer the question, Kerm, or too chicken?
Angryclown isn’t focusing social oprobrium on you, nate. He already knows you’re an idiot. He is interested in finding out who else is.
By the way, you sure you don’t want to add to your list of black people you find acceptable?
Pure and simple? No. Nothing involving 100-plus million voters is ever “pure and simple”.
I think Obama’s race had less to do with the election than the media’s view of race did. Jack Caffrey was far from the only person who said not supporting Obama was racist in and of itself. And his race – and the “isn’t it time?” aspects of it – were a key part of marketing him. (He’s clean and articulate, too!).
But the media’s refusal to really look into what a pretty, empty suit he is? How very thin his resume really is?
Even honest media people are ashamed of how in the bag the media were.
“Affirmative Action?” I dunno. Unqualified for the office? Absolutely.
And I’d vote for a black lesbian atheist conservative with a solid track record in a heartbeat against anyone of any race with Obama’s record and beliefs.
Mitch promised: “And I’d vote for a black lesbian atheist conservative with a solid track record in a heartbeat against anyone of any race with Obama’s record and beliefs.”
Let me know when you get one, ‘kay? Cause right now your party is pretty white, straight (at least in public) and Jesus-loving (again, at least in public).
Well Clownie, the Democrat party set itself up with a choice between a woman and a (partly) black man. Racism or sexism? It seems they embody both with aplomb.
Those of us capable of critical thought were in complete agreement with Mitch. Obama is profoundly unqualified for the office. Hillary Clinton was by far the better choice.
So I asked the question, and you are the chicken because you ducked it.
Didja like the comedian Sinbad, nate? Cause that should count in your favor, right?
Oh, for the love of Christ.
nate Says:
June 23rd, 2009 at 1:02 pm
Comment of the month.
Deflection of the month.
trying again since that was the comment/html fail of the month
nate Says:
June 23rd, 2009 at 1:02 pm
Comment of the month.
angryclown Says:
June 23rd, 2009 at 1:08 pm
Deflection of the month.
sigh….tag closed for sure this time
Meltdown! Sweet. Not one of your best, AssClown, but not too shabby.
Behold the power and blind adoration of the Obamassiah; the liberals still refuse to acknowledge the malaise Obama has delivered.
I hoped a Burbot like AssClown would have the ability to hold a bit of skepticism toward Obama.
It’s possible my writing isn’t clear enough for someone with your level of reading comprehension, AC. Here’s what I wrote:
“No other politician in America could be elected President with a resume as thin as his – they couldn’t even get nominated. He got the nod because of his race, pure and simple.”
In this paragraph, the phrase “he got the nod” was intended to refer to receiving the Democrat nomination, not to winning the general election. I think it does but I admit it’s been a long time since sentence diagramming. I can see how you’d read it the other way. That’s okay – I’ll stand behind that version, too. No backpedaling here. let me say it in words even you can understand:
Barak Obama received the Democrat nomination because he was a Black man and Hillary was only a white Woman. In Democrat victim rankings Black trumps Woman so he got the nod.
Experience had nothing to do with the decision. Responsible Democrat leaders were furiously trying to avoid it right up to the convention but the fear of being labeled racists was too much.
Further, Barak Obama was elected President because he was a Black man and John McCain was only a white man.
Black trumps white for all Democrats, and also for anybody who’s afraid of being labeled a racist, as the public was repeatedly warned during the campaign. Intimidation works on some people (just not on me, as you’re learning).
Race alone may not have been enough to put him over the top – Obama had help from the leg-tingling Bush-haters in the media, from McCain’s inept campaign, and from an economic crisis that peaked before the election just in time to divert people’s attention away from the fact that we were no longer losing the war in Iraq so we needed something else to blame on Bush-Cheney as a reason to vote for Hope and Change.
But mostly, I believe a hell of a lot of ordinary Americans voted for Obama because he’s a young, slender Black man who reads a good speech and looks fab in a nice suit and it’s about time we had one of those around here instead of some stuffy old white man.
Kennedy versus Nixon, except without Kennedy’s experience and money but with the added benefit of redressing a grievous social injustice.
Barak Obama is an Affirmative Action hire. He’s unqualified and incompetent. But you knew that and you hired him anyway. So do what you do in the workplace when the Diversity Office forces you to hire somebody to meet a quota: admit it and live with it.
Admitting you have a problem. That’s the first step, AC. We can’t begin to deal with the disaster that is the Obama Administration until we admit that the top of the org chart is an empty suit. A nice suit, to be sure, and it reads aloud well; but an empty suit nonetheless.
.
Cause right now your party is pretty white,
Ah. So race IS an issue!
straight (at least in public)
Since Swiftee’s not here yet, I guess it falls to me to ask; you know something we don’t? And how did you find out?
and Jesus-loving.
You say that like it’s a bad thing.
Jesus loves Angryclown too.
I’ve been waiting for months for Angry Clown to say exactly what qualifies Obama to be be prez.
His responses to date have been tautological (“he won”) or inane (“he was chief editor of his law school’s journal”).
The guy got poor grades as an undergraduate and he was admitted to Harvard Law School. He was offered tenure on hire at the University if Chicago without having published in any legal journals. While he taught law he worked for a legal firm with close ties to the disgraced Blagojevich administration. He won his first election (to the Illinois House representing and urban Chicago district) by getting his opponent taken off the ballot. He won his US senate seat by default (his opponent was an out-of-state resident brought in at the last minute).
The reason the clown is flailing in this thread is because he can’t articulate why Obama is fit to lead the country. Instead he says that Bush is stupid, and that anyone who thinks Obama is unqualified is a racist. I guess that in liberal circles these are considered rhetorical slam-dunks.
Kermit croaked: “Well Clownie, the Democrat party set itself up with a choice between a woman and a (partly) black man. Racism or sexism? It seems they embody both with aplomb.”
And the Republic party set itself up with a choice between a white guy and six other white guys. I guess that’s how you kooks prove you’re not racist or sexist.
By the way, say hi for Angrclown to that Chinese brother-in-law who insulates you from all charges you’re a racist, ‘kay? Bet you really liked Sinbad too?
“I’ve been waiting for months for Angry Clown to say exactly what qualifies Obama to be be prez.”
A majority of electoral votes, Chachi. The only qualification that matters.
Ah. So Dubya WAS more qualified than Kerry or Gore, no questions asked or tolerated.
Glad we got that cleared up.
Well he did win one of those elections.
I’m “insulated” from charges of being racist because, well, I’m not racist. You can smear all you want, but that seltzer bottle is pointed in the wrong direction.
A majority of electoral votes, Chachi. The only qualification that matters.
And yet when it was “Shrub” that same same qualification was somehow illegitimate. Who’s the racist?
Easy, Kerm. You kooks.
Well he did win one of those elections.
Right!
So – by your own logic, you were a traitor from (let’s be, what else, conservative) 2004-2008!