Obama must start punching harder (contorted liberal point of view)

ft.com ^ | October 12 2009 | Gideon Rachman

[ransomnote]

The notion that Mr Obama is a weak leader is now spreading in ways that are dangerous to his presidency. The fact that he won the Nobel Peace Prize last Friday will not change this impression. Peace is all very well. But Mr Obama now needs to pick a fight in public – and win it with a clean knock-out.

[ransomnote]

The author seems to have no idea at all who Obama really is. I found myself reading this article more for the creative interpretation of Obama than for the proposed solution. There are odd little nuggets throughout the article - he refers to Saturday Night Live as the 'Sarah Palin Slayer', a meme that the MSN is pushing lately. He quotes Cohen saying that Obama "inspires alot of affection (!) but not alot of awe". There were many such odd moments (i.e., "Even the president’s strengths can begin to look like weaknesses.") in this article. Reading it was an Alice-in-Wonderland rabbit hole experience.

[Ueriah]

It is so Orwellian that it’s not even funny.

I’m waiting for them to try to legislate a daily 5 minute hatred of the GOP.

[a fool in paradise]

One leading European politician warns that Mr Obama is looking weak on the Middle East: “If he says to the Israelis ‘no more settlements’, there have got to be no more settlements.” And yet it is the White House, not the Israeli government, that has backed down.

Actually the president is weak because he lets Iran pursue joining the "nuclear power" nation status (as in nations that posess nuclear weapons, not just nuclear power-generating plants).

He's weak because he's turning his back on America's allies and sucking up to dictators getting nothing in return.

He talks smack about America and wants us to be "loved" as a result of "admitting" that we are "horrible" and "always have been".

[Jack Hammer]

So... all assertive Blacks are boxers? That’s a bit racist.

Obama’s already won a significant victory; he’s placed modern art in the White House, something only a certified Tough Guy could accomplish. Interior Decorators can be tough, too, when they want to be.

[Tzimisce]

Peace is all very well. But Mr Obama now needs to pick a fight in public – and win it with a clean knock-out.

So to prove he is worthy of the Peace Prize, he needs to pick a fight?

[Tenacious 1]

Obama deserves some credit. He has begun and should get credit for the redistribution of Americas wealth to other nations through the devaluation of the dollar. He is succeeding handsomely in making things more fair for all the other countries of the world at the expense of our nations economic and military expense.

[Tenacious 1]

My favorite part was the little notable comparison between BO and BC. Clinton’s presidency started off pretty rocky but look how it ended. LOL.

[ransomnote]

Obama campaigned his weakness, was elected for his weakness, ‘earned’ a Nobel prize for his ‘promising’ weakness, and has strutted his weakness from the oval office; Obama is arguably the human embodiment of weakness - complete with a glass jaw and everything. Yet the author of the article refers to the ‘notion’ of Obama’s weakness. I looked up ‘notion’ in the online dictionary service Onelook.com and found a definition
“an odd or fanciful or capricious idea. “ I believe this means the writer has written an ‘odd or fanciful or capricious” article.

[McGruff]

Mr Obama now needs to pick a fight in public – and win it with a clean knock-out.

Waah. Rush Limbaugh hit me in the eye. Waah!

[Dr. Thorne]

Frankly, I think Obama is generally chicken and leave any fights to his handlers. He's a Zero, plain and simple.

That said, some of his handlers are truly vicious and lust to suppress our freedoms in order to amass all power to themselves. But, they forget that conservatives have the weaponry in this country and we won't give it up.

[a fool in paradise]

And to think they saddled GHW Bush with “the Wimp Factor”.

[ransomnote]

There was a great video circulating about 3 or 4 years ago comparing John Edwards to George Bush in the way that they regarded their hair - it was set to the soundtrack to the movie Rawhide. It has, apparently, been pulled for unauthorized use of the soundtrack (according to YouTube). John Edwards - scrunching his nose like a bunny as he carefully pats his hair perfectly into place in such an intense way - like he is diffusing a bomb. Followed by a clip of George Bush on camera, apparently instructed to ‘fix his hair’ , George reaches up and makes an annoyed swipe or two through his hair with the palm of his hand and then looks back at the camera as if to say “there -it’s done, now what”? Then the video would cut back to John Edwards receiving hairspray, painstakingly patting his hair - then back to George’s ‘instant fix’. I hope you saw it back then - it was great.

[CodeToad]

More violence from the extreme left-wing.

[flowerplough]

The British news magazine Economist, way back in March, on Obama: "Curiously feeble."

"His performance has been weaker than those who endorsed his candidacy, including this newspaper, had hoped. Many of his strongest supporters—liberal columnists, prominent donors, Democratic Party stalwarts—have started to question him. As for those not so beholden, polls show that independent voters again prefer Republicans to Democrats, a startling reversal of fortune in just a few weeks. Mr Obama’s once-celestial approval ratings are about where George Bush’s were at this stage in his awful presidency. Despite his resounding electoral victory, his solid majorities in both chambers of Congress and the obvious goodwill of the bulk of the electorate, Mr Obama has seemed curiously feeble."

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/03/28/economist-obamas-not-who-we-thought-he-was/

[Oztrich Boy]

But Mr Obama now needs to pick a fight in public – and win it with a clean knock-out.

Give the boy a break. He's trying to find someone he can beat up: The Government of Honduras, Fox News. But who could predict that the sacricifial lambs might resist?

[RinaseaofDs]

It’s tough when you are on the wrong side of every issue, and you are hell-bent on perpetrating the same acts history, even very recent history, has proven are mistakes.

What can Obama cleanly win at? He now HAS to bomb Iran, since we conceded Star Wars (our only chip) on the expectation that we’d get Russian help on Iranian sanctions.

That didn’t happen. (It’s like Obama offing his queen in chess on the ‘understanding’ the other guy would off his queen too.)

Meanwhile, we’re in Afghanistan, whose main supply route is airspace over Georgia, which isn’t the most secure supply route on earth.

The pickle that Obama is in is that if he concedes to a troop surge, the Russians might cut those troops off and let the Taliban slowly kill them all off. The Taliban will get fresh supplies from the Russians, of course, and the whole thing will be a ‘blame America’ move: “You shouldn’t have given them stingers back in the 80’s!! - Payback is a bowl of bad borcht, eh comrade Obama?”

That’s why the bunker busters are so key here. All we can do is help the Israelis beat the Iranians. Hell, even the Saudis and Egyptians are rooting for us here.

All of war is logistics. Iraq is a different place than Afghanistan, which is land locked. Russia shares borders with both Iran and Afghanistan. We have, really, no friendles in the area.

In my opinion, the key is India. They stand an excellent chance of becoming the next Ukraine.