Nice Speech...

[kalm]

But does anyone actually believe a word Obama is saying? Transparency? Special interests? Bush Tax Cuts? Financial services reform? Too big to fail? Consolidation of wealth and power?

He can try and sound like Teddy Roosevelt all he wants while completely ignoring his own track record but he ain't no progressive. (Sorry conks )

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/de ... ama-speech" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Here's an excerpt from Teddy Roosevelt's "New Nationalism" speech he was trying to emulate:

At many stages in the advance of humanity, this conflict between the men who possess more than they have earned and the men who have earned more than they possess is the central condition of progress. In our day it appears as the struggle of free men to gain and hold the right of self-government as against the special interests, who twist the methods of free government into machinery for defeating the popular will. At every stage, and under all circumstances, the essence of the struggle is to equalize opportunity, destroy privilege, and give to the life and citizenship of every individual the highest possible value both to himself and to the commonwealth. That is nothing new. All I ask in civil life is what you fought for in the Civil War. I ask that civil life be carried on according to the spirit in which the army was carried on. You never get perfect justice, but the effort in handling the army was to bring to the front the men who could do the job. Nobody grudged promotion to Grant, or Sherman, or Thomas, or Sheridan, because they earned it. The only complaint was when a man got promotion which he did not earn.

Practical equality of opportunity for all citizens, when we achieve it, will have two great results. First, every man will have a fair chance to make of himself all that in him lies; to reach the highest point to which his capacities, unassisted by special privilege of his own and unhampered by the special privilege of others, can carry him, and to get for himself and his family substantially what he has earned. Second, equality of opportunity means that the commonwealth will get from every citizen the highest service of which he is capable. No man who carries the burden of the special privileges of another can give to the commonwealth that service to which it is fairly entitled.

[GannonFan]

I've lost faith in Obama. I probably won't vote for him again, but unclear if I'll even vote for anyone as the options are obviously scant. He sounds and acts just like any other politician - sometimes with better speeches, but almost always with the same effect.

Interesting, though, that while he tried to emulate TR's speech, it differed in that all important distinction. TR was talking about the need for equal opportunity. Obama's speech comes off as the need for equal outcome. Certainly not the first time things have fallen on either side of that issue.

[AZGrizFan]

I've lost faith in Obama. I probably won't vote for him again, but unclear if I'll even vote for anyone as the options are obviously scant. He sounds and acts just like any other politician - sometimes with better speeches, but almost always with the same effect.

Interesting, though, that while he tried to emulate TR's speech, it differed in that all important distinction. TR was talking about the need for equal opportunity. Obama's speech comes off as the need for equal outcome. Certainly not the first time things have fallen on either side of that issue.

Newt.

[kalm]

I've lost faith in Obama. I probably won't vote for him again, but unclear if I'll even vote for anyone as the options are obviously scant. He sounds and acts just like any other politician - sometimes with better speeches, but almost always with the same effect.

Interesting, though, that while he tried to emulate TR's speech, it differed in that all important distinction. TR was talking about the need for equal opportunity. Obama's speech comes off as the need for equal outcome. Certainly not the first time things have fallen on either side of that issue.

Yep, that was one TR's most endearing qualities. A willingness to roll up your sleeves and earn it. BTW, he was suggesting that for both the haves and the have nots. He recognized that entrenched wealth also led to undeserved gains.

"At many stages in the advance of humanity, this conflict between the men who possess more than they have earned and the men who have earned more than they possess is the central condition of progress."

[Ivytalk]

I listened to two or three Obama speeches early on, but I've tuned him out: a glib, smug empty suit. If TR were alive today, he'd probably be a Clinton Democrat.

[death dealer]

Yep, that was one TR's most endearing qualities. A willingness to roll up your sleeves and earn it. BTW, he was suggesting that for both the haves and the have nots. He recognized that entrenched wealth also led to undeserved gains.

"At many stages in the advance of humanity, this conflict between the men who possess more than they have earned and the men who have earned more than they possess is the central condition of progress."

You definitely do not have to be rich, or be of the entrenched wealthy, to fall into this category. Most of the people I know who are on the govt. dole would fit right in there. Done nothing, deserve nothing. I support the notion that if you have money, you should use it, and invest it to improve society, not let it rot in a bank. I also support any govt. program that truly aids those wanting to get ahead and make something of themselves through hard work. That's why I've said for years that college and grad school should be free, but only available to the folks who can earn the right to be there through hard work.

But I don't support a govt. giveaway to award laziness.

[CAA Flagship]

I've lost faith in Obama. I probably won't vote for him again,

So you are saying you once had faith in Obama? To do what? What was it that you hoped he would do? Just curious.

[UNI88]

I've lost faith in Obama. I probably won't vote for him again,

So you are saying you once had faith in Obama? To do what? What was it that you hoped he would do? Just curious.

Obama's Hopium can be a powerful narcotic and was very appealing and addictive to many in 2008. Unfortunately, many have since realized that the actual results don't come anywhere near to measuring up to what the initial highs promised.

[GannonFan]

I've lost faith in Obama. I probably won't vote for him again,

So you are saying you once had faith in Obama? To do what? What was it that you hoped he would do? Just curious.

Well, I was hoping for less politicizing and more roll up the sleeves, let's get to the table and fix the things that are wrong. Instead, we got pretty much the same kind of politician that we normally get: the other side is evil and we need to start focusing on the next campaign. Both sides do it equally so it's not like the GOP is any better. I had just hoped that Obama would've risen above that. Who knows, maybe if the Dems hadn't won the supermajority in Congress and Obama didn't get run roughshod over by Reid and Pelosi maybe he would've fared better, because he lost all his mojo in that debacle of a first year and he's not gotten it back since.

If there is a bright side, I didn't think I really had an alternative even then - McCain's fine as a Senator, especially for a state I don't live in, but I think he would've been an awful President - so taking a leap with Obama wasn't that much of a risk. On the downside, I don't think I really have an alternative again this election coming up.

[CID1990]

When substance becomes more important than style, then we will elect capable Presidents more frequently.

If capability and experience counted for anything, John Huntsman would be getting serious looks by the GoP as the man who could defeat the incumbent President Hillary Clinton.

[AZGrizFan]

If there is a bright side, I didn't think I really had an alternative even then - McCain's fine as a Senator, especially for a state I don't live in, but I think he would've been an awful President - so taking a leap with Obama wasn't that much of a risk. On the downside, I don't think I really have an alternative again this election coming up.

So, given that Obama has been an awful president, even acknowledging McCain might have been equally awful as a "bridgebuilder", at the very LEAST we wouldn't have Obamacare, massive additional wasted money in "stimulus" packages, $15 trillion in debt, Fast & Furious, one party holding all three branches, Sotamayor, Kagen, etc, etc, etc.

[kalm]

Clueless

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/0 ... 34196.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[AZGrizFan]

Clueless

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/0 ... 34196.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The truth is a bitch, ain't it? But Obama's press secretaries have never let the truth get in the way of a good press conference.

[kalm]

Clueless

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/0 ... 34196.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The truth is a bitch, ain't it? But Obama's press secretaries have never let the truth get in the way of a good press conference.

The truth was apparent one week into office when he appointed Geithner and hired summers. It's just amazing how publicly out of step his administration is with reality.

[native]

...Obama's Hopium ...

[CID1990]

The truth is a bitch, ain't it? But Obama's press secretaries have never let the truth get in the way of a good press conference.

The truth was apparent one week into office when he appointed Geithner and hired summers. It's just amazing how publicly out of step his administration is with reality.

Everything this administration has done is perfectly understandable. You just gave to judge them through the lens of ideology rather than reality. Then you will see it.

[Pwns]

Some of us knew Obama was an empty suit all along.