This guy's got it all figured out.
Posted on 08/01/2009 6:38:46 AM PDT by kellynla
Audio: 'Administration doesn't really know what its diplomatic strategy will be'
Where is the link??
He’s not “naive”. Only the naive think so.
John Bolton is ameliorating his adjective here.
No...the worthless president knows exactly what he’s doing. Lies, deceit, and anything to accomplish the total destruction of America is his agenda...
His flock of sheep is countless too!
Exactly. 0bama is many things, but naive, clueless and stupid are none of those things. 0bama is doing everything he is doing because the outcome is his intention.
If we misunderestimate the intellectual prowess of our enemies, then we will always lose.
Ignorant and arrogant
Oops! Here ya go.
Link:http://live.radioamerica.org/loudwater/player.pl?name=wnd&url=http://feeds.radioamerica.org/podcast/DWP/audio/000007_011421.mp3
Admin Moderator: Please post link. Thanks
“He’s not “naive”. Only the naive think so.”
It depends on what you mean by ‘naive’. He is clearly Machiavellian, and probably fairly crafty in that regard, and he knows who his enemies are and how to target them. His world view is, however, naive and sophomoric.
No, he’s not. If he doesn’t know exactly what’s he’s doing at the moment, and how to accomplish it, his objectives aren’t swayed.
“His world view is, however, naive and sophomoric.”
Yeah, naive and sophomoric like Rev. Wright, when he danced on the graves of 3,000 9/11 victims and blamed it on the Jooooooos.
He's extremely naive. He might know what he wants to do, but has no clue about the cause and effect of the programs he wants to implement, or what result he will get from the actions he takes.
He's also very deficient in knowledge and understanding in general re: history, economics, government, human behavior, etc.
C’mon folks. This guy rose to the top of Chicago politics. He “didn’t know” Blagojevich or Bill Ayers, “just a guy in his neighborhood” and he never heard an ill word from Jeremiah Wright.
It’s like winking and saying “Can’t I just eat my waffle?”.
Naive and sophomoric isn't synonymous with innocuous, and I don't think for a second that Obama and his minions are not dangerous, and hateful. They quite clearly are. They are capable of capsizing the greatest nation that has ever existed on this planet. When, however, Obama says that we can save billions on health care AND expand coverage, he truly believes this crap. So do a lot of academics. Ironically they think they are saying this from a position of great knowledge and understanding. The truth is that they know little about what they are talking about. They are not ‘naive’ in the sense of ‘wide-eyed and innocent’. They are naive in being blind to their own stupidity.
“”No...the worthless president knows exactly what he’s doing. Lies, deceit, and anything to accomplish the total destruction of America is his agenda...””
Who is pulling his strings? The man isn’t capable of this all by himself. They put him there, they are still controlling him. WHO?
Being crafty or clever is not the same as having understanding and knowledge, or wisdom. A person can be clever in some matters and extremely naive in their understanding of complex matters like the economy, foreign policy, the behavior of thugs and dictators in other cultures, etc.
Even the slickest con men are naive about more complex matters.
He doesn't care if it bankrupts the country; which, BTW, is going bankrupt already.
It just buys him more time with his lemmings.
When it all collapses, he will say “see I was a nice guy, I just didn't realize THIS would happen”.
Underestimating your opponent is the first mistake of war; and politics.
The Japanese would set up a nice fat convoy and sail it right into the hands of American submarines. While a sub-hunter lagged behind just over the horizon. His “naivete” is a smokescreen to disarm some of his opponents and buy more time.
This guy went from nowhere to the most powerful office on the face of the Earth. It didn't happen because he's stupid and naive. He knows how to play people.
And he would love for you to think he has no idea what he's doing.
Sure, he's unqualified to fix the economy, which is, frankly, irreparably-damaged. How the descent goes is what we choose. But not all of his political gambits work; because he's human, he executes with errors.
Watch Liev Schreiber bemoan those who can't see through his campaign-generated veneer in the remake of “The Manchurian Candidate”.
Barry is savvy enough to use those fools to get where he got. Inept, inexperienced and unqualified he is. Naive and stupid, politically, he's not. But he does stumble while he probes the boundaries.
Sure it does. You are suggesting he’s some dumb kid who doesn’t understand the real world. And is bumbling his way through it.
He has objectives. They are not the objectives of your world or traditional American values.
They are the objectives of someone who wishes to transform the country into his image of what it should be.
And he has made that abundantly clear both before and after the campaign.
ambitious and unethical
crazy and well-armed
drunk and wild
stupid and evil
naïve and arrogant
That winking and waffle was in regards to a direct question asked him about Israel.
He's a student of Saul Alinsky, a close associate of Bill Ayers and a relative of the revolutionary in Kenya.
You think he would be disappointed or surprised to see chaos in the world?
Hardly ...
Yes I did. And you still claim he is “naive”.
He is not.
You make him out to be an idealist from an alternate reality. That is the thrust of your original post.
And I repeat, he is not naive. That doesn’t mean he’s an expert on those things, of course. But they’re not part of his objective in fundamentally remaking America to his bizarre model.
Obama campaigned on a Realist foreign policy and has followed realist policies.
Bolton is a neocon and is criticizing Obama's realist policies.
As for being utopian, neo-conservatism, relative to realism, is idealism, a form of utopianism.
Obama is a realist? Sorry, I disagree.
Only to the point that he was able to leverage the economic hardships of some part of America to the voting booth.
He intends to reduce America to the current level of Great Britain or perhaps France.
It’s no accident that he spoke about the “errors of colonialism” (paraphrased).
If that chaos destroyed his presidency and any chance of being reelected, sure he'd hate to see it. Those here he say Obama wants to destroy the US are dealing in silly hyperbole.
Leftists do want to get control of successful capitalist societies and use the wealth created to their own ends, but what do they have if they destroy an affluent society? They'd have chaos and anarchy far beyond their control, and of no use whatsoever to their purposes.
Obama's first attempts to meet with Iran with no pre-conditions showed his naivete. Iran responded with their own pre-conditions: that the US apologize for a long list of past wrongs committed against Iran.
His naive approaches to Russia have been thrown back in his face.
The guy is naivete personified, exceed only perhaps by those who try to find some genius at work in every example of his naivete.
Naivete was Jimmy Carter in 1976. One of the few thing's he got right though, was continuing with the Ohio despite the virulent protests against deployment of the new ships.
I've long said Obama would be no match for Putin and I said so before the election.
There's a difference between naivete and being a rookie. He's a rookie that he thinks his Chicago schmooz would work on somebody like Putin, or Chavez, or Kim Jong Il. That they would be stunned at his basketball playing. It must have been more than slightly ego-deflating.
But this guy has always leveraged the radical side of America to gain political power, the NBPP, his special efforts to LGBT. Read his own statement that he chose the most radical, most Marxist, etc.
That's what I mean that he's not naive.
But is he a rookie? Well, absolutely. He's never really done much of anything.
Rookie and naive are synonymous in many ways. People can learn and get beyond some of their naivete. But Obama is definitely naive in a broad range of categories a president must deal with.
And John Bolton is one of the most qualified people around to comment on Obama's naivete in many areas. And I think Obama's naivete will persist because so much of leftist ideology is naive and Utopian. The left is naive, and it's pretty remarkable to find anyone at FR who does not see that same naivete in Obama.
This guy's got it all figured out.
He does believe it, and it has nothing to do with the ability to do math. It's about being informed enough to put the right numbers into the equation. He is not. I know a fair number of very highly educated people who still hold to the idiotic sentiment that socialism and communism are good concepts that have just not been implemented properly. Ideology blinds people, even if they can do math. I'm not making excuses for Obama. I actually think he is even MORE dangerous because he believes his own drivel.
Having objectives and being naive are not mutually exclusive. That's where you get off track. The two can exist in the same person. And Obama is incredibly naive in many ways. Thinking that silly beer summit was a good move was naive. 70% think he was wrong in this incident, that meeting was considered silly by all but his hard core supporters. He hurt his presidency this week, but thought he was being so clever.
We probably have many talented young singers around the US who's objective is to be a bigger star than Elvis Presley or Michael Jackson, and a few who believe it will happen.
While the economy crumbles, even the President, even Obozo has to talk it up, because their word almost immediately translates to investor panic and even further loss of consumer confidence. Stop the music all of a sudden in our kind of economy and you've got a real shocker.
He knows these numbers can't work. But he must continue to do so. He cannot afford to lose than Dem-controlled Congress in 2010. So keep the lemmings believing he will deliver and keep the rest of us believing he doesn't know what he's doing.
If he gets past 2010, he's still got Pelosi and Reid to do much of his bidding.
Contrast that with the founding generation who understood human nature and the tendency of persons in power to abuse it.
"It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. We hold this prudent jealousy to be the first duty of citizens and one of the noblest characteristics of the Revolution. The freemen of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise and entangled the question in precedents. They saw all the consequences in the principle [usurpation of power] and they avoided the consequences by denying the principle. We revere this lesson too much . . . to forget it." - James Madison
" . . . nip the shoots of arbitrary power in the bud, is the only maxim which can ever preserve the liberties of any people. When the people give way, their deceivers, betrayers, and destroyers press upon them so fast, that there is no resisting afterwards. The nature of the encroachment upon the American constitution is such, as to grow every day more and more encroaching. Like a cancer, it eats faster and faster every hour. The revenue creates pensioners, and the penshioners urge for more revenue. The people grow less stead, spirited, and virtuous, the seekers more numerous and more corrupt, and every day increases the circles of their dependents and expectants, until virtue, integrity, public spirit, simplicity, and frugality, become the objects of ridicule and scorn, and vanity, lusury, foppery, selfishness, meanness and downright venality swallow up the whole society." John Adams
It was not just the founding leaders who were well-informed about their constitution. By 1830, when the French jurist Tocqueville traveled America, he wrote admiringly of the citizenry, observing that even the backwoodsman was far more well-read and informed than those in other parts of the world, and that they understood their Constitution, and had a Bible and a newspaper.
Today, with all modern means of communication, Americans possess little understanding of threats to their liberty and, thus, risk losing it to charlatans whose only goal is power.
Thank you.
Absolutely not, because his ignorance is only one aspect of who he is. He is also driven by an ideology he shares with Rev. Wright. He does have an agenda, no question, and I believe he has a great deal of resentment and anger that drives him. He is also, no question, driven by his narcissism, but this is hardly unique amongst politicians.
He has objectives, dude. And they aren't based in naivete.”
Yes, he most definitely has objectives, and they are very, very disturbing and dangerous. Nonetheless, his ‘black and white’, ‘fair and unfair’, ‘bad rich and good poor’ etc. world view is sophomoric. People who divide the world into the ‘good’ Tiny Tim types, and the ‘bad’ Ebenezer Scrooge types are just infantile in their world view.
I think we agree for the most part. I’m not saying that he doesn’t lie. He does it all the time. I agree that he and his minions know that the economic numbers are much worse than they want people to think, and I totally agree that they want the public to believe otherwise so that they start spending. But I also believe that they think that over the long haul their way is going to fix everything. It’s ridiculous to think that blacks are living in poor conditions in the inner city because the rich aren’t taxed enough, but there are plenty on the left, in elected office, who actually believe this tripe. I don’t know what else to call that besides delusional and naive. Suggestions?
I'll grant you he might actually have been naive enough to believe it would work on dumb America. Frankly, it probably did for some. And we know the MSM loved it.
There's almost nothing he might do and them not love it.
I'm not saying mutually exclusive, per se. I'm saying he's not naive in his objectives. He may be naive (and indeed is) often in his approach and execution.
But, for example, Israel. Now I'll have to listen to Bolton's statement here but I've heard many times that Obama is “naive” regarding Israel and her enemies.
Anybody who believes that is disconnected from reality.
I'm trying to think of a good way to put into words what I would use to assess his foreign policy.
Try this: I would put Obozo as a guy who lied on his resume and used every trick to get himself into the cockpit of a 747. Then during takeoff roll, when you reach the point of no stopping the aircraft, you realize he's never flown a plane before; much less a 747.
Most of us saw that coming and voiced our opposition. I can't classify that as “naivete”.
I would put that as a self-aggrandizing usurper with little regard for the dangerous consequences to his passengers because it didn't serve his own self interestes.
A few leftist idealists, opportunists who have smaller or focused agendas, some who feign ignorance because it gives them a political base to operate from (Obozo), and, at worst, foreign operatives.
It was no accident that Soviet influence was found, through layered support and obfuscated relationships, to some of the “movements” of the 1960’s. Some of the members of various “movements” were too stupid to realize they were puppets in a much larger game.
That's one reason the FBI was trying to figure out where some of the money was coming from.
It's no accident many “peace” groups found support, some of them not realizing their “disarm America's nuclear arsenal” was coming at the same time the Russians were on a huge ICBM and other nuclear-weapons buildup.
I'm sure Putin and Medvedev are slapping each other on the back while Barry negotiates away our weapons.
What I'm not certain, is that this guy is totally naive, when his Marxist mother and father met in a Russian language class. I'm not saying he's a Russian plant. I'm saying his basic sympathies don't lie with what most of us knew as America in the 1970's and 1980's for example. His crotch-salute of the American flag was a very public display of that. Oh he wears it on his lapel now. He won't make that public mistake again.
In the Adams’ quotation, a word should have been “steady,” not “stead.” Sorry!
That was you original statement, and it contains none of the word parsing and hair-splitting you've engaged in since. Bolton is right, Obama is naive (incredibly) and arrogant.
I'd say only the naive don't recognize Obama's naivete.
OK, you’ve convinced me. Obama just doesn’t know what he’s doing.
Just a happy-go-lucky fella who stumbled into the Presidency, Barney-Fife style.
Hope we can all guide him and make him a great President. /sarc
Thank you!...for bringing it to my attention. LOL
This guy is so bad, even the left will wash their hands of him. This is nothing but national suicide.
Let the impeachment proceedings begin. No, I’m not kidding. This guy has got to go.
You know what, the left is finally getting their comeuppance. When it is realized how badly their guy betrayed the nation.
I submit a “naive” guy doesn’t pick up a book like that, written by a guy with a background like that, allows it to be seen publicly, etc. It’s a very clear statement on what interests him and what he wants to read up on.
And attends a church like he did for 17 years. These are not coincidences.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.