Replies

I have to disagree. The lack of focus is intentional, as is the refusal to talk about details. He may not be up to speed on process (he'll leave the humdrum details to his underlings), but he is total agreement with the goals (about which he can't be honest), and he intends to exert an ever-increasing executive control over all. He has utter contempt for the intelligence of the public and the media, and relies on aura of cocky authoritarianism and sophistry to lull the masses.

I appreciate the difference of opinion, but let's be frank here. Obama is the consummate void. He comes out and advances these programs, but these programs were dictated to him. Sure he may agree, but he isn't up to speed enough, and doesn't have the adult stature that is require to pull this off.

He never had that ability. He's the equivalent of a news reader. He reads his teleprompter just fine. Take it away and this guy is a simpleton. I talk of him as if he were a child, because in reality, he is. He is the equivalent of a ten year old boy acting out in his parents drawing room, while his parents do nothing and query guests if he isn't the cutest thing they've ever seen. Well, no he isn't. He's a impudent bore. The media that plays the role of parent here, is a misguided, propagandist entity, being hoodwinked by people that would knife them in the back for a pack of cigarettes.

To say he's out of his depth is to give him an excuse for the assault on freedom that he's directing.

He is complicit. He is not in control. He even has to ask what the bills he is signing actually do. I don't give him cover here. He damns himself in ways that I couldn't cover for. I am simply heralding what is taking place here as I see it.

Obama is the consummate void. He comes out and advances these programs, but these programs were dictated to him. Sure he may agree, but he isn't up to speed enough, and doesn't have the adult stature that is require to pull this off.

Time will tell whether he can "pull it off" or not. My concern is these "empty suit" arguments work to his advantage, in that they'll allow him, with the media's assistance, to disassociate himself from whatever disastrous results accumulate from his policies, by blaming various expendable appointees for failures and/or mistakes.

Didn't we see this process in the case of Jeremiah Wright, when his 20-year association with a toxic racist was sloughed off with the excuse that he himself hasn't verbalized these sentiments, and that he really wasn't attending the church because he agreed with those statements, but for other more innocuous reasons? Net damage to Obama: Zero. Ditto Rezko, Ayers, etc.

Haven't we also seen the affect in the musings of supposedly "right-wing" pundits who've insisted on prefacing criticism of policy with, "I'm sure Obama is a nice man...but.." or some such nonsense? Or in the admonitions to "give him a chance" in the early days after the election?

I see the same attitude now even in his supporters who are having second thoughts about the stimulus bill. But, rather than blaming their cult hero, they blame Congress, ignoring the fact that it's Obama who's using the bully pulpit to ram it through.