Lame Duck President Who Leads From Behind

[SuperHornet]

Wow. I was shocked when I saw this. But every word of it is true as far as I've seen in the news.

I'm sure you can guess who posted this on Facebook today.

After listening to the President’s press conference today, let’s keep in mind the following:



This is the same president who proposed an absurdly irresponsible budget that would increase our debt by trillions of dollars, and whose party failed to even put forward a budget in over 800 days! This is the same president who is pushing our country to the brink because of his reckless spending on things like the nearly trillion dollar “stimulus” boondoggle. This is the same president who ignored his own debt commission’s recommendations and demonized the voices of fiscal sanity who proposed responsible plans to reform our entitlement programs and rein in our dangerous debt trajectory. This is the same president who wanted to push through an increase in the debt ceiling that didn’t include any cuts in government spending! This is the same president who wants to slam Americans with tax hikes to cover his reckless spending, but has threatened to veto a bill proposing a balanced budget amendment. This is the same president who hasn’t put forward a responsible plan himself, but has rejected reasonable proposals that would tackle our debt. This is the same president who still refuses to understand that the American electorate rejected his big government agenda last November. As I said in Madison, Wisconsin, at the Tax Day Tea Party rally, “We don’t want it. We can’t afford it. And we are unwilling to pay for it.”



Now the President is outraged because the GOP House leadership called his bluff and ended discussions with him because they deemed him an obstruction to any real solution to the debt crisis.



He has been deemed a lame duck president. And he is angry now because he is being treated as such.



His foreign policy strategy has been described as “leading from behind.” Well, that’s his domestic policy strategy as well. Why should he be surprised that he’s been left behind in the negotiations when he’s been leading from behind on this debt crisis?



Thank you, GOP House leaders. Please don’t get wobbly on us now.



2012 can’t come soon enough.

[blueballs]

Can't argue with any of that...

The only thing I'd add is this: it seems like Obama never tackles a problem head on but instead waits until the last minute, declares it a crisis, never puts forth a plan or policy that faces public scrutiny, then rams something through in a shady backroom deal.

It has gone beyond the point of being real old. This guy wasn't and isn't qualified to be president and was exactly what this nation didn't need coming off the Bush second term debacle. As bad as Bush was this guy is 10x worse and has and is continuing to do real long term damage to our nation.

I don't care who gets elected come next year as long as it ain't him, and fuck the democrats for not seeing this and offering a primary challenger to make him debate the issues and be accountable for his pathetic record and complete lack of leadership- something he will not do in the public eye currently.

[BlueHen86]

I'm not sure he's a lame duck. I still think he gets re-elected. We were dumb enough to re-elect Bush II.

We don't demand good leadership, so we don't get it.

[kalm]

I'm not sure he's a lame duck. I still think he gets re-elected. We were dumb enough to re-elect Bush II.

We don't demand good leadership, so we don't get it.

Agreed, but do you think our system is set up to elect politicians to lead or to represent?

[Ivytalk]

Wow. I was shocked when I saw this. But every word of it is true as far as I've seen in the news.

I'm sure you can guess who posted this on Facebook today.

After listening to the President’s press conference today, let’s keep in mind the following:



This is the same president who proposed an absurdly irresponsible budget that would increase our debt by trillions of dollars, and whose party failed to even put forward a budget in over 800 days! This is the same president who is pushing our country to the brink because of his reckless spending on things like the nearly trillion dollar “stimulus” boondoggle. This is the same president who ignored his own debt commission’s recommendations and demonized the voices of fiscal sanity who proposed responsible plans to reform our entitlement programs and rein in our dangerous debt trajectory. This is the same president who wanted to push through an increase in the debt ceiling that didn’t include any cuts in government spending! This is the same president who wants to slam Americans with tax hikes to cover his reckless spending, but has threatened to veto a bill proposing a balanced budget amendment. This is the same president who hasn’t put forward a responsible plan himself, but has rejected reasonable proposals that would tackle our debt. This is the same president who still refuses to understand that the American electorate rejected his big government agenda last November. As I said in Madison, Wisconsin, at the Tax Day Tea Party rally, “We don’t want it. We can’t afford it. And we are unwilling to pay for it.”



Now the President is outraged because the GOP House leadership called his bluff and ended discussions with him because they deemed him an obstruction to any real solution to the debt crisis.



He has been deemed a lame duck president. And he is angry now because he is being treated as such.



His foreign policy strategy has been described as “leading from behind.” Well, that’s his domestic policy strategy as well. Why should he be surprised that he’s been left behind in the negotiations when he’s been leading from behind on this debt crisis?



Thank you, GOP House leaders. Please don’t get wobbly on us now.



2012 can’t come soon enough.

Er, Ron Paul?

[93henfan]

I'm not sure he's a lame duck. I still think he gets re-elected. We were dumb enough to re-elect Bush II.

We don't demand good leadership, so we don't get it.

Agreed, but do you think our system is set up to elect politicians to lead or to represent?

They represent lobbyists, of course. Not us.

The Republicans are every bit as much to blame as Obama in this, btw. If you want to get back to a balanced budget, you need painful cuts and painful increases in revenue. Pretty basic math.

[∞∞∞]

I thought he had a decent press-conference yesterday. First calmly explained the situation and what needs to be done, and then showed his frustration with the politicians in the House of Representatives.

[TheDancinMonarch]

I thought he had a decent press-conference yesterday. First calmly explained the situation and what needs to be done, and then showed his frustration with the politicians in the House of Representatives.

O'Bama is a politician too. It always amuses me when one politician accuses other politicians of being political. Much like a wren accusing a robin of being a bird.

[CitadelGrad]

I thought he had a decent press-conference yesterday. First calmly explained the situation and what needs to be done, and then showed his frustration with the politicians in the House of Representatives.

His press conference was designed to panic the markets over the weekend and get them to drop like a rock on Monday morning. Then Obama will declare a crisis and and use it as leverage to get his tax increases.

[∞∞∞]

I thought he had a decent press-conference yesterday. First calmly explained the situation and what needs to be done, and then showed his frustration with the politicians in the House of Representatives.

His press conference was designed to panic the markets over the weekend and get them to drop like a rock on Monday morning. Then Obama will declare a crisis and and use it as leverage to get his tax increases.

You must've been watching a different press conference than me 'cause he specifically mentioned how Wall Street shouldn't worry when it opens up again on Monday and the reason why...

[travelinman67]

I'm not sure he's a lame duck. I still think he gets re-elected. We were dumb enough to re-elect Bush II.

We don't demand good leadership, so we don't get it.

It's all about who's running against him. Bush had Kerry...which explains why America re-elected Dubya despite his ineptness and the Dem operatives failed billion dollar campaign to unseat him.

The Republicans have several usable candidates...NOT Bachmann. A good rule of thumb is...note whichever Conservative candidate the MSM gives airtime to...then ignore that candidate. MSM will attempt to shift voters to the left by promoting the least competent conservative candidate.

The Republicans could unseat Obama IF they focus on cutting government and creating jobs. Everything else is chaff.

My advice to RNC handlers would be to privately sit down with the "Christian Right", "Abortion", "Immigration", "Free Trade" litmus test groups, and ask them to keep their pious, intransigent mouthes shut 'til afer November 2012.

[CitadelGrad]

His press conference was designed to panic the markets over the weekend and get them to drop like a rock on Monday morning. Then Obama will declare a crisis and and use it as leverage to get his tax increases.

You must've been watching a different press conference than me 'cause he specifically mentioned how Wall Street shouldn't worry when it opens up again on Monday and the reason why...

Yes, and Wall St. knows better. The bone he threw to Wall St. was for consumption on Main St.

[∞∞∞]

You must've been watching a different press conference than me 'cause he specifically mentioned how Wall Street shouldn't worry when it opens up again on Monday and the reason why...

Yes, and Wall St. knows better. The bone he threw to Wall St. was for consumption on Main St.

Wall Street is gonna do its own thing regardless of what the President says. Like you said, they know better. He may have thrown a bone to Main St., but his press conference wasn't "designed to panic the markets." If we go by the logic that Wall St. knows better, then the President could literally say anything and it wouldn't matter at all. He could say "the markets are screwed on Monday" or "the markets shouldn't panic," and the outcome will be the same. So I'm not sure how the press conference was designed to panic the markets if what he says is irrelevant...

[SuperHornet]

Er, Ron Paul?

Um, no.

[Ivytalk]

Er, Ron Paul?

Um, no.

Uh, Michelle Bachmann?

[SuperHornet]

Um, no.

Uh, Michelle Bachmann?

Strike TWO.

[Ivytalk]

Uh, Michelle Bachmann?

Strike TWO.

Oh, fuck it, then.

[∞∞∞]

Strike TWO.

Oh, fuck it, then.

Well if it's not those two, I think there's only one other politician SH has a crush on.

"Who is Sarah Palin?" for $500...

[ODUsmitty]

Changed the title to comply with the new Don't Ask Don't Tell repeal, as it applies to this forum and dbackjon

[JohnStOnge]

I don't think he's "Lame Duck." I think if one had to bet right now one would bet he's going to be re-elected.

I'm not saying I like that. As I've said before I don't think he's qualified to be manager of a 7-11 much less President of the United States plus I think his philosophies are all wrong. But I think that's the reality.

[SuperHornet]

Cubed gets the chicken dinner....

[Rob Iola]

Guys it's not wall street it's the asian markets that people are focused on - as long as they stay calm and are willing to buy our debt nobody's going to seriously negotiate.

[BlueHen86]

I'm not sure he's a lame duck. I still think he gets re-elected. We were dumb enough to re-elect Bush II.

We don't demand good leadership, so we don't get it.

It's all about who's running against him. Bush had Kerry...which explains why America re-elected Dubya despite his ineptness and the Dem operatives failed billion dollar campaign to unseat him.

The Republicans have several usable candidates...NOT Bachmann. A good rule of thumb is...note whichever Conservative candidate the MSM gives airtime to...then ignore that candidate. MSM will attempt to shift voters to the left by promoting the least competent conservative candidate.

The Republicans could unseat Obama IF they focus on cutting government and creating jobs. Everything else is chaff.

My advice to RNC handlers would be to privately sit down with the "Christian Right", "Abortion", "Immigration", "Free Trade" litmus test groups, and ask them to keep their pious, intransigent mouthes shut 'til afer November 2012.

I agree with much of what you say here. I think the RNC should include the Tea Party in the sit down. The Tea Party's uncompromising position on not raising taxes is not helping. The Tea Party has done a great job on putting focus on spending cuts and should continue to do so, but if a tax increase is needed (even after making cuts) then it should be an option.

[travelinman67]

It's all about who's running against him. Bush had Kerry...which explains why America re-elected Dubya despite his ineptness and the Dem operatives failed billion dollar campaign to unseat him.

The Republicans have several usable candidates...NOT Bachmann. A good rule of thumb is...note whichever Conservative candidate the MSM gives airtime to...then ignore that candidate. MSM will attempt to shift voters to the left by promoting the least competent conservative candidate.

The Republicans could unseat Obama IF they focus on cutting government and creating jobs. Everything else is chaff.

My advice to RNC handlers would be to privately sit down with the "Christian Right", "Abortion", "Immigration", "Free Trade" litmus test groups, and ask them to keep their pious, intransigent mouthes shut 'til afer November 2012.

I agree with much of what you say here. I think the RNC should include the Tea Party in the sit down. The Tea Party's uncompromising position on not raising taxes is not helping. The Tea Party has done a great job on putting focus on spending cuts and should continue to do so, but if a tax increase is needed (even after making cuts) then it should be an option.

I honestly don't believe the "Tea Party" is influencing the current budget negotiations. The "tax" issues are major-league corporate/old-money influenced: Always have been, always will be. The WH and House dance are just that...posturing to determine which will be at the front and end of the campaign donation "A-train". In the end...the middle class ALWAYS gets f*******; old-money/limousine liberals wink at each other from across the table and split the prime-rib; corporations skim off the flood of new-found profit and fill their investors pockets with the loot; and the politicians continue their scam.

[kalm]

I agree with much of what you say here. I think the RNC should include the Tea Party in the sit down. The Tea Party's uncompromising position on not raising taxes is not helping. The Tea Party has done a great job on putting focus on spending cuts and should continue to do so, but if a tax increase is needed (even after making cuts) then it should be an option.

I honestly don't believe the "Tea Party" is influencing the current budget negotiations. The "tax" issues are major-league corporate/old-money influenced: Always have been, always will be. The WH and House dance are just that...posturing to determine which will be at the front and end of the campaign donation "A-train". In the end...the middle class ALWAYS gets f*******; old-money/limousine liberals wink at each other from across the table and split the prime-rib; corporations skim off the flood of new-found profit and fill their investors pockets with the loot; and the politicians continue their scam.

Wow! Welcome to the cynic's corner.