Skip to main content

View Diary: Obama is smarter than I am (697 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Perhaps (18+ / 0-)

    your point of view is not well served by nourishing it within a hermetically sealed environment. Can you posit any kind of hypothetical which results in Obama ever coming off looking good in your eyes? Even temporarily?

    And what kind of clusterfuck exactly did Obama create? I hadn't been aware that among his powers as Supreme Commander was the ability to inflict civil war on other nation/states.

    •  Sure... (7+ / 0-)
      Can you posit any kind of hypothetical which results in Obama ever coming off looking good in your eyes? Even temporarily?
      His decision to go to Congress first before shooting missiles at Syria.

      Everything else, however, has been a clusterfuck.

      Red lines, missiles before diplomacy, Munich Moments, etc.




      Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ J. Garcia

      by DeadHead on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 03:56:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  What were the disastrous consequences (8+ / 0-)

        to those rather benign statements? They are characteristic of a lot of government statements during evolving crises of one sort or another. You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

        •  Yes, of course. It's standard operating procedure (6+ / 0-)

          for the SoS to go Godwin.

          The disastrous consequences? Things haven't exactly finished playing out yet, so I'll have to get back to you on that.

          In the meantime, you go right ahead a chalk this up as some kind of brilliant political maneuvering, if you want. I consider it recklessness that didn't need to happen in the first place.

          That's just how I look at things — cynically. I find myself less surprised and disillusioned when things start going south, and more relieved when they don't turn out as bad as expected. Win-win!




          Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ J. Garcia

          by DeadHead on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 05:40:43 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I see. (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            edwardssl, chaboard, Gurnt
            The disastrous consequences? Things haven't exactly finished playing out yet, so I'll have to get back to you on that.
            In other words there haven't been any. Well alright then. If this were an actual clusterfuck I guess we'd all still have our pants on.
            •  I see (6+ / 0-)

              Because there haven't been any, there couldn't still BE any.

              And because there hasn't been any and there's no possibility of there being any, mrblifil thinks this went swimmingly right from the very start, and everyone's just been running around with their hair on fire over nothing.

              Because Obama's got this.

              Did I get that about right?




              Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ J. Garcia

              by DeadHead on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 08:34:09 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Well there COULD BE some, so lets attack Obama (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Gurnt, Rooe, mrblifil

                Any chance we have to attack him, we have to do it.

                He's going to cave on the debt ceiling! We don't have to wait, we know it's going to happen.

                It didn't happen? Well, he's going to cave on (insert new thing here). It COULD HAPPEN.

                I know you guys hate to give President Obama any credit, but how about lets wait until consequences happen to attack him.

                After all we just heard upthread that we can't even accuse Assad of gassing his people, because a guy who freely admits killing tens of thousands with conventional arms would never, never do such a thing.

                When we stop putting leaders from the past up on pedestals and ignoring their flaws, we can start seeing our present leaders for what they really are.

                by PhillyJeff on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 10:58:51 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I hate to interrupt your ardent support (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Claudius Bombarnac, Johnny Q

                  But the guy is an elected official. A real powerful one.

                  I know you think you're protecting him from all the meanie Obama Haters who just want to hate and attack him just because they don't have anything fucking better to do, but this is serious shit, okay?

                  When he's in the process of fucking up, we need to tell him, and keep telling him, while it's still possible to influence the outcome, not after it's a done deal.

                  What you see as hair on fire nontroversies that never panned out and let all of us "haters" down because we didn't get to hate Obama for fucking up, is actually part of the democratic process and our duty as citizens.

                  So you can "wait" as long as you want. Something tells me you'll still be "waiting" before you "attack" him, even if those "consequences" do in fact come to pass.




                  Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ J. Garcia

                  by DeadHead on Tue Sep 10, 2013 at 01:10:25 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  It's kind of horrible to have the "hair on fire" (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    DeadHead

                    meme used in the case of possible war.

                    I guess the 2/3 of Americans who strongly oppose Syrian intervention also have their hair on fire.

                    The party of Kennedy is also the party of Eastland. The party of Javits is also the party of Goldwater. Where is our party? Where is the political party that will make it unnecessary to march on Washington?

                    by SouthernLiberalinMD on Tue Sep 10, 2013 at 06:41:29 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I'm using your own argument (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      sviscusi

                      You're ripping Obama to shreds because you think he's going to bomb Syria no matter what.

                      Now it appears we've forced a diplomatic solution on the Russians and Syrians, but we can't give Obama any credit because hey, we MIGHT still bomb.

                      So basically we can never give Obama credit for anything. DADT overturned? Who knows, maybe it'll come back in the future so no credit. Fair pay act? Maybe it won't get enforced properly. No credit.

                      You could just say "this is a great development, and I hope it comes to pass" instead of "Obama is still a terrible warmonger and I think he's still going to bomb, so no credit for him"

                      When we stop putting leaders from the past up on pedestals and ignoring their flaws, we can start seeing our present leaders for what they really are.

                      by PhillyJeff on Tue Sep 10, 2013 at 12:45:07 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Actually, I don't think you've looked (0+ / 0-)

                        at my comments. I went upthread and saw nothing in my comments like what you're talking about.

                        Nonetheless, it still is completely creepy that what you care about most in all this is Obama getting credit. You're kind of proving a point I made elsewhere:  that for a lot of people on this site, the lodestar of their political thought is that Obama is good, and their main goal is that Obama look good. No matter what the issue or circumstances.

                        To put it more simply:

                        What you're worrying about here is whether or not Obama is getting a fair shake on a political blog.

                        What I'm worrying about is whether or not we're going to get dragged into a dangerous, ill-advised quagmire of a war.

                        The party of Kennedy is also the party of Eastland. The party of Javits is also the party of Goldwater. Where is our party? Where is the political party that will make it unnecessary to march on Washington?

                        by SouthernLiberalinMD on Wed Sep 11, 2013 at 09:11:49 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  I don't care who gets credit (0+ / 0-)

                          I just don't understand why a certain segment of the left will not give President Obama credit for literally anything that he does.

                          And not only that, but you'll attack him regardless of the outcome for things that haven't happened and may never happen, because you're convinced he is simultaneously an evil genius who hates progressive America and a bumbling idiotic fool who can't do anything right.

                          He attacks Syria without going to congress - warmonger.
                          He goes to congress and makes his case - weakling/backtracking
                          Looks like he'll get a diplomatic solution accomplishing more than he could have hoped for without firing a shot - lucky, but he's still a warmonger.

                          I just honestly do not understand why people can't just be happy it looks like we got a good solution no matter how we got it.

                          Why do you have to qualify that with "Well, Obama is still a warmonger so I'm not going to hold my breath."

                          When we stop putting leaders from the past up on pedestals and ignoring their flaws, we can start seeing our present leaders for what they really are.

                          by PhillyJeff on Thu Sep 12, 2013 at 11:38:38 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

              •  This is a typical argument for them. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                DeadHead

                As in "there are no Social Security cuts yet so why are you so upset?"

                Because, of course, it will do a lot of good to get upset after the Social Security cuts go through.

                Their lodestar is that Obama is good. Their goal is that Obama look good, always. Those are the central points of reference for every discussion they have on here that has, or could have, anything to do with the President. There is nothing, repeat, nothing that will ever change that.

                The party of Kennedy is also the party of Eastland. The party of Javits is also the party of Goldwater. Where is our party? Where is the political party that will make it unnecessary to march on Washington?

                by SouthernLiberalinMD on Tue Sep 10, 2013 at 06:40:20 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  Well (0+ / 0-)

                actually no, you got nothing right so far. But keep trying. Stopped clock and whatnot.

                I'm not the one who made claims of clusterfuckery, farce and disaster. It's incumbent on the people who make such claims to be able to reasonably defend them when challenged. So far, not so good.

                •  I figured you'd see it that way. (0+ / 0-)

                  I didn't make "claims," I gave my opinion based on the timeline of blunders readily apparent to everyone other than the administration apologists/revisionists currently making the rounds.

                  Just because you want to erase the clown show performance that lead up to where we're at now doesn't mean it didn't happen, or that there wasn't a better way of handling this.




                  Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ J. Garcia

                  by DeadHead on Tue Sep 10, 2013 at 12:29:08 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Funny (0+ / 0-)

                    that's what our opponents say about the ACA, that it's a failure, a disgrace, a joke, impeachable offense etc. etc.

                    "Clown show?" First you deplore an attack commencing, then when steps are taken to defuse the potential for action, you can do nothing but deride in scalding terms. I thought avoiding conflict was your desired goal? I imagine if the President personally thanked "DeadHead" from the podium at the next SOTU for hit prescient and trenchant political analysis, he'd still be an asshole.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site