November 30, 2009

"With just one speech tomorrow night you will turn a multitude of young people who were the backbone of your campaign into disillusioned cynics."

Disillusioned cynics ≈ realistic skeptics. I don't see the problem.

69 comments:

m00se said...

Oh, reality bites, dunnit Barry?

vbspurs said...

Just to show you not everyone who voted for Obama was less than 30 years old, this comment below Moore's blogpost:

Thanks for your expressions of encouragement to change, but we both know that is not going to happen. I did send an email, expressing my disappointment and
my hope that, like McNamara, he will apologize once he realizes his mistake. Also like McNamara, no apology will exonorate him from this gross error and he will have to carry that shame to the end of his days. This will, of course,
kill any meaningful health care reform and will assure his position in history as a one-term president.

I also suggested that he not add to his shame by accepting the Nobel Peace Prize, but he will probably make that mistake as well. BTW, Where do I apply for a
refund of the contributions I gave his election campaign. Given that I am now 72, I think I will pass on believing in any promises of future presidential candidates. For this vet, life is getting too short to spend time on such futile
efforts.


72 and asking for a refund from a politico's campaign because said politico failed him? Talk about not having gotten wiser with age.

Cheers,
Victoria

vbspurs said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
John Lynch said...

I someone cannot fight a war they should never be President. That is the most important job they have.

War isn't always something we choose, so any president, no matter how pacific, can have a war thrust on them. They had better be ready.

Obama had the advantage of knowing what wars we were in. There's really no excuse for people to be surprised.

former law student said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Maguro said...

How so, Michael? Obama campaigned on the notion that the war in Afghanistan was under-resourced and now he's following through as promised.

Kirby Olson said...

The young people who voted for Obama will follow him anywhere. They don't care what he thinks. He's like Tiger. He's good.

Jason (the commenter) said...

They already seem disillusioned to me. I was talking to one of them the other day, campaigned door to door for Obama, and he was talking about how hard it is to get a job that pays any money now-a-days.

Obama has more important things to worry about than Afghanistan or healthcare if he wants to keep the support of "young people". He needs to worry about the economy. He should have made that his number one priority all along. I know he plans to deal with the economy next, but trying to fix problems after they become obvious to everyone only makes you look out of touch.

vbspurs said...

How so, Michael? Obama campaigned on the notion that the war in Afghanistan was under-resourced and now he's following through as promised.

This just shows you that "gotcha" campaign platforms used to shame the other side about their ineffectiveness, which I am positive the majority of Obama supporters believed was never his true position and that he was going to cut-and-run the moment he took power, can come bite you on the ass.

vbspurs said...

wv: patso!

That's eerily like pazzo, which means crazy in Italian...but with a Fatso twist. Heh.

rcocean said...

I'm cynical - but full of illusions.

miller said...

Such haters!

Hope!

Change!

Yes! We! Can!

If you put enough exclamation marks into your writing, IT BECOME TRUE!

(WV: Drearica, the land that was once USA and now ruled by MC President)

(and TRUER with CAPS!)

Florida said...

Failed Law Student said: "I'm still assuming Obama is not an idiot."

Then you're clearly not paying attention.

Jason (the commenter) said...

former law student: Let's hear his rationale. I'm still assuming Obama is not an idiot.

It doesn't matter what his rationale is. He was supposed to stop all the wars Bush started. Rationalizing what he is doing will only make it worse because it will only make him sound more like the kind of person anti-war groups despise.

Florida said...

"Michael Moore's ideal candidate seems to have been Kucinich ..."

No, Michael Moore's ideal candidate is Michael Moore ... only he's too much of a pussy to actually run.

Bob_R said...

I love all of these people who feel betrayed when Obama KEEPS a campaign promise (cf., e.g., gay marriage)

I always assume that politicians are lying directly to ME - that they wave up each morning thinking, "How can I put one over on Bob?" On Obama, lots of people (not mentioning any names here) seem to have thought that he was lying to someone else, but that they secretly knew the truth. Bad strategy.

Florida said...

"... the majority of Obama supporters believed was never his true position ..."

That's the problem with the left in this country - they believe their candidates hide their true positions from the public and will reveal them only after being elected.

Obama hates gays, for example ... but the homosexuals are unable to admit this despite everything he does to them to hurt them (DADT, gay marriage bans, etc.)

Now, the anti-war left is getting its turn.

Hope they lubed up.

traditionalguy said...

But a true leader would give us his best stirring speech promising victory as soon as the enemy gets tired of implanting IED bombs every quarter mile down that long lonely road. This backbreaking hard labor alone should encourage an early surrender by 2016. The US forces do get to use drones delivering Hellfire missiles to return fire. Yet I have the sinking feeling that Obama doesn't want to get our hopes up around here and he also wants to avoid any anger from his Moslem constituency that he has to apologise to in most speeches. So I expect Obama will use the classic rhetorical tactic of speaking softly and meaning every word of it.

vbspurs said...

I'm checking all the links to Moore's post, and I confess -- instead of knee-slapping glee at their impotent outrage, I already feel ennui this decision is provoking in the Left-leaning blogs.

It's not like he's "all in" like Bush gambled with the Surge in Iraq. This is a cautious check, waiting to see what the Turn card reveals, the minimum he can do and still stay in the game. The terrorists smell his hesitancy and know he doesn't have the stomach to call their bluff.

It's September 2008 all over again, and Obama is trusting that fate in the form of an unforeseen catastrophe to the other side will help him out again.

Cheers,
Victoria

Ignorance is Bliss said...

While Micheal Moore's opposition does not guarantee that a policy is correct, that is certainly the way to bet.

vbspurs said...

Bob_R wrote:

On Obama, lots of people (not mentioning any names here) seem to have thought that he was lying to someone else, but that they secretly knew the truth. Bad strategy.

It reminds me of one of the few times I've watched the Daily Show, I think when Stewart was commenting on Obama's Inaugural Speech, which had a very gung-ho "don't mess with bull or you'll get the horns"-like line:

"Riffing with Senior White House Bureau Chief Jason Jones -- who was gushing over Obama's inaugural address, Stewart demurred. He compared it to a certain ex-president's:

"Our nation's relationship with the almighty? A message for our enemies?" Stewart said, questioning Obama's rhetoric. "Isn't that ... Bush?"

Then came a side-by-side montage comparing Bush's speeches and Obama's opening day address. Jones was dejected.

"Why are you doing this?" Jones said. "It's hope, Day 1."

"I know, I don't like it either," Stewart said, apologetically. "I don't like doing this either!" (OK, so maybe he's still in his satire transition phase.)

Jones offered a disclaimer: "When Obama says this stuff, I don't think he doesn't really mean it. And that gives me hope."

...It's Hope Day 1. Sheesh.

When McCain said in the debate, "I know where Bin Laden is, and if I'm elected, I'll get him! I'll get him!", I knew that was BS. How gullible are some people, man. Serves you right, Obamaniacs.

Cheers,
Victoria

Big Mike said...

Kids gotta grow up sometime.

peter hoh said...

If Obama accumulates enough of the right enemies, will the Right begin to soften on him?

Fen said...

Who gives a rats ass what that fat ass idiot says.

avwh said...

If the war doesn't turn the young people into disillusioned cynics, just wait until they graduate and can't get jobs....the next two years or more will be brutal on those entering the workforce with no experience (Obama's policies almost ensure a jobless recovery).

ricpic said...

The main thing from Hussein's standpoint is to make a show of sorta kinda pursuing victory abroad as a thousand minarets rise in total victory over the infidel here at home.

edutcher said...

The big, fat pig ignores the fact that A-stan was "the necessary war, the REAL war on terror", as Victoria has mentioned. This was what, supposedly, they voted for him to do. Then again, we're talking about people like Ann, who've admitted to buyer's remorse. The lefties only want to see us lose, so they can relive the glory days of 'Nam.

Considering that "exit strategy" is supposed to factor largely (pardon my syntax) in his "thinking", this whole business is starting to make 'Nam look like a headlong rush to victory.

Back then, the best we could hope for was to break even; now, the rooftop of the US Embassy in Saigon in '75 is apparently the most optimistic outcome. 75 - 85% of what McChrystal (his chosen man, after all) wanted has the distinct smell of LBJ.

All we need now is to hear, "Come, let us reason together".

Or have we already heard it?

Eric said...

It doesn't matter what his rationale is. He was supposed to stop all the wars Bush started. Rationalizing what he is doing will only make it worse because it will only make him sound more like the kind of person anti-war groups despise.

But no, he never said he was going to pull our troops out of A-stan. Afghanistan was the important war we should have been pouring resources into instead of Iraq. It was right there on his campaign website. He was promising to catch bin Laden, soothe the savage Islamist heart, and, you know, invade Pakistan.

I find this all very comical, as I did with the people expecting Obama to sign on to gay marriage. Everybody expects politicians to lie on occasion, but the Obama fans seemed to believe they could tell which positions were empty and which were heartfelt. You had groups with diametrically opposite expectations supporting the man and thinking "boy, those other guys are sure gonna be disappointed".

When it turns out the man actually meant some of what he said during the campaign, well, I can certainly see why you might've thought otherwise, but you can hardly chalk it up as a betrayal.

MadisonMan said...

Ann, who've admitted to buyer's remorse.

I've not seen (read) that.

Florida said...

Oh by the way ... how's that Gitmo closing coming along?

edutcher said...

MadisonMan said...

Ann, who've admitted to buyer's remorse.

I've not seen (read) that.


She has certainly pulled back from her endorsement of him, including a great deal of criticism. She may not have used the phrase, but she isn't at all happy with what she's seen.

somefeller said...

Michael Moore was always against the war in Afghanistan, so it's not like this is a situation in which he is changing his tune on an issue or has become disillusioned with the actions of Obama on the issue. If anything, Moore is being the cynic here by acting as though Obama is doing a terrible thing by supporting a war that he has always supported and that Moore always opposed. There are plenty of good examples of people who have changed their mind about the wisdom of continued US involvement in Afghanistan that are worth listening to (George Will, Matthew Hoh, etc. -- though I don't necessarily agree with them), but Michael Moore is not one of them.

John Stodder said...

Does Moore think young people will watch that speech?

They're too busy killing each other off in Mafia Wars or buying hay icons in Farmville.

Just like Iraq was not like Vietnam, neither is Afghanistan and for the same reason. No draft. Those who are fighting for our country are doing it on their own dime. They're young, and they've been waiting for this speech for two or three months. The rest of the young crowd would regain their enthusiasm if Obama did something really cool, like help them find jobs.

Joe said...

Obama promised to ramp up the war in Afghanistan and appears to be doing just that. So, if Obama didn't lie about Afghanistan like he did everything else, then his followers will become cynics. That may be the most cynical view of all!

Fred4Pres said...

I will pay for a thimble full of Michael Moore's tears.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

The young people who voted for Obama will follow him anywhere. They don't care what he thinks

That is until he starts putting the screws to the Internet, as he is planning to do.

Don't mess with the Net!! These younger people live on it. It is their communication, entertainment, social life, their alpha and omega. If you start messing with their access and making them cut back on World of Warcraft.....all hell will break loose.

Bruce Hayden said...

One of the more blackly humorous parts of the Obama Presidency is that his biggest supporters are the ones hurt the worst by his policies.

The youth are getting hit from all sides. Minimum wage increases increased the cost of hiring low skill workers, and thus increasing the cost of many of them over their marginal utility. This is a long way of saying that the minimum wage increase pushed youth (and, in particular, minority youth) out of those jobs. Yes, those who had jobs earned a bit more, but fewer had those jobs. The result? Record unemployment at the low end of the jobs market, nearing 20% officially, and in some communities double that.

ObamaCare is another place where they are going to be hurt badly.
- They will lose much of their current discount for health care. The differential between, say 20 and 60 will drop from maybe 6-1 to 2-1 primarily by raising premiums on the younger employees.
- They won't be able to get around this by not carrying insurance, even if they don't need it, since health care insurance will be mandatory (or, they will pay a hefty fine).
- Providing health care insurance for employees would become mandatory for many, if not most, employers. This again drives up the marginal cost of employees, to the level that, again, there will be layoffs.
- And who is going to pay for the trillions of dollars of borrowing to support all this? The youth who can break through the minimum wage trap discussed above and who get into good paying jobs.

As a famous radio personality repeatedly points out, actions have consequences, and I would suggest that their putting Obama into the White House is going to have major consequences for them for the rest of their lives.

AprilApple said...

uh - Obama has been dealing with the economy. He and his pals in congress have made it worse. Want a really sick economy? Pass health care reform, now! The time for talk is over; it's time to really screw up the economy.

Sure, it will take time, but we must start somewhere.

traditionalguy said...

Joe the Plumber and Sarah Palin warned the voters about Obama's distain for everyone who works outside of government work or for Windmill Erectors. His wife did mention that they need to start to grow their own food to live on while awaiting their job working for the government at whatever wage the government can afford. Welcome to Cuba north, you young Obama worshipers.

Pogo said...

If just a few patriotic Americans were to take Michael Moore to, say, Peru, our country's debt problem would be halved.

Jebus Hades, at $15K a liter, a caravan of TV cast-offs from The Biggest Loser, Dance Your Ass Off, DietTribe, and Ruby, led by Moore, would be one hell of a stimulus package.

JAL said...

This nails it pretty well.

Paddy O. said...

Corrected:

"With just one speech tomorrow night you will turn me, who wwas the backbone of your campaign, into a disillusioned cynic. You will teach me what I've always heard is true -- that all politicians are alike."

But he'll still vote for him in 2012. "This time it'll be better, baby, I know it will. He'll just try harder. I just can't leave him. I love him so."

wv: Copodira. The less fun alternative to the Copacabana. You'd think there would be dancing, but it's all talk.

victoria said...

Poor Obama, still cleaning up after Bush. It will take most, if not all of his 1st term to clean up the colossal mess that Bushie and his cronies left behind. And, if there is any truth to the rumor that the administration had the chance to get Bin Laden and didn't get him, he will be cleaning up Bush's messes in his second term. Bush, Cheney and Rummie should be prosecuted as war criminals and locked up for good, for the good of the country.


Vicki from Pasadena

victoria said...

tradguy, you are really invoking the name of Joe the plumber? And with a straight face? Please, rather listen to my gardener, he's smarter.

Vicki from Pasadena

Paddy O. said...

Every President is still cleaning up the mess of George Washington--who was a real man and took responsibility for his actions.

Since then, no President has ever made a mistake on his own or been a cause of any crisis. We've been specially blessed that way.

Palladian said...

Hmm, so how long is Obama going to coast on that old "cleaning up the horrible catastrophe of George W. Bush" line? True believers, like the lowercase victoria, who is lowercase in so many ways, may be satisfied with that explanation, but to the majority of the voting population it's beginning to wear very thin. It's the political equivalent of running on fumes.

traditionalguy said...

Victoria...The industrial plant jobs are no longer here. They went to China, India Thailand, Vietnam, Mexico and Korea where people work cheaper. That leaves Americans the jobs serving one another's needs, like Plumbers. To start a plumbing business a man/woman needs skill and a Bank Loan, and a favorable environment on regulations and local taxes. These traditional factors arremain MIA under Obama and Pelossi policies. I suspect that this is because our current President and George Soros despise such arrogant people as Joe the Plumber who actually want the power to control a wealth producing private business which they claim to own. Only Obama and his Czars are entitled to use of such powers. This attitude is why rational and serious people think Obama and Soros are closet fascists. BTW, how are the small business start-ups doing in job creation in Golden California?

somefeller said...

"This attitude is why rational and serious people think Obama and Soros are closet fascists."

Actually, they don't. Most rational and serious people are still largely pro-Obama, and the ones that aren't pro-Obama don't go in for the closet fascist or liberal fascist nonsense. If you spent more time around rational and serious people, or for that matter, generally successful people, you'd know that.

Palladian said...

"If you spent more time around rational and serious people, or for that matter, generally successful people, you'd know that."

Well then we'd better get out of your presence and go and find some. The rational, serious and generally successful people that I know don't believe that planned economy, a great smile and hope is meet material for a president.

Kansas City said...

This strikes me as a pretty weak thread. Obama seems to have accomplished what Bush did, causing both his opponents and his supporters to lose a significant part of their ability to honesty and reasonably assess matters.

To the Bush haters, you need to let go of blaming Bush for everything. Obama dimnishes himself with his constant whining about Bush.

To the Obama haters, I think you need to accept that he is not trying to intentionally screw things up. He is in over his head and making mistakes, but I think he is trying to do his best (which unfortunately, is hampered by a very liberal/socialist mindset).

As to Afghanistan, I fear he is about to make a huge mistake based on a combination of left wing pacifism, lack of true support from his own party, and the insane obsession with "exit strategy." There is no good exit strategy from war other than victory, or giving up if you cannnot win. Obama is about to try to combine a small escalation with an exist strategy, which is a naive blunder that tells the enemy to just wait him out. I can't believe that exit strategy has become such an accepted bromide of our foreign policy.

Palladian said...

"To the Obama haters, I think you need to accept that he is not trying to intentionally screw things up. He is in over his head and making mistakes, but I think he is trying to do his best"

I don't have your faith in the quality of his character.

I assume that all politicians start from a position of evil and then I work backwards. Guilty until proven innocent.

somefeller said...

"The rational, serious and generally successful people that I know don't believe that planned economy, a great smile and hope is meet material for a president."

Fortunately, there's more to this Administration than that. That's why the tea partiers and their friends are so worked up. But the "rational, serious and generally successful people" that I know (both Democratic and Republican) don't run around howling about closet fascists and the like, which was the main point. That too is left for the tea partiers.

somefeller said...

"To the Bush haters, you need to let go of blaming Bush for everything. Obama dimnishes himself with his constant whining about Bush."

Agreed. Bush was an awful President who left Obama a hell of a mess to clean up, but after awhile, it's not enough to talk about Bush's mess. That having been said, it's not wrong to point out that Bush's yes-men and enablers (Boehner, Cantor, et al) are many of those who are getting in the way of improving the situation right now.

Beth said...

Disillusioned cynics ≈ realistic skeptics. I don't see the problem

Ha! Well said!

I never hesitate to tweak Althouse when I think it's warranted, so let me be sure to cheer her likewise.

victoria said...

Trad guy, 1. There were more "czars" under Bush than their are under Obama. 2. Joe didn't own his business, he was just and employee. He is neither noble or "better" than us because he does "real" work. Please, this hack of the right wing has about as much credibility and real common sense as Megan McCain.
Obama is no fascist.

How are start up, small businesses in Southern California, doing great. I have many friends who own small businesses, hair dressers, tire store owners, etc. They are doing just fine. We are not afraid of the boogie man and the right wing scare tactics that have served your party for so long.

Remember, we have a Republican governor. You all hate him.

Palladian, I hope that you all have to eat your words concerning the "coasting". Despite your people's efforts, good change and prosperity is around the corner. That is not communist blabber, that is talk from a business loving, capitalist.


It is so easy to label anyone who does not fit in to your narrow idea of what a good American is a communist. It makes you all feel vaguely superior to those you classify as un-american. Bull.


Lower case victoria is every bit as patriotic as uppercase Victoria

Vicki from Pasadena

Eli Blake said...

In 1916, a foreign force under Pancho Villa attacked the United States, murdered Americans and led our army on a 2,000 mile chase all over Mexico. We never did get Villa.

It seems that by now we've been chasing bin Laden for a long time, but we are increasingly unlikely to find him, especially with a big bulky army lumbering around.

That's not to say that we shouldn't continue to collect intelligence and maybe even launch air strikes and covert/special ops where we have particularly actionable intelligence but continuing to use the U.S. army to hunt down a few terrorists is like using a sledgehammer to cut diamonds. It's the wrong tool for the task.

bagoh20 said...

If I read things right, there are a lot of people really disappointed by the twin possibilities that the U.S. may not lose a war in their lifetime and the planet may not be ruined by AGW. But, they can still look forward to global economic collapse as their heroes continue to work hard for that consolation prize.

Seriously, you really need some introspection if: you find yourself dismayed by the possibility of things not being as bad as you "hoped" because your hero will not be able to deliver that ridiculous fantasy in your head, where the post racial, shining intellect devoid of past battles won, somehow saves the world through shear force of his specialness and education.

That is really not smart nor wise, but it is lame. Men great and small do accomplish great things, but it is not magic, nor automatic, and it is best to expect it from those with a history of doing something real. I'm not optimistic, but I am developing a crush on lady luck.

Synova said...

One thing that Obama campaigned on was himself as Afghan War President.

Tough words! Macho posturing!

But for the GOOD war.

If he actually follows through on that it will be one of the very few things he had in his campaign that he took into his Presidency.

But Moore knows how easy it is to adjust History by simply acting as though the revised version is the truth.

traditionalguy said...

Eli Blake @ 11:24...I Totally agree with you. The US Army in the mountain valleys is doing nothing except serve as training targets for the Moslem Guerrila forces to perfect their IED bomb/ambush coordinated actions.

Synova said...

"To the Obama haters, I think you need to accept that he is not trying to intentionally screw things up. He is in over his head and making mistakes, but I think he is trying to do his best"

Palladian: "I don't have your faith in the quality of his character."

What is the possible relevance of the quality of his character to the economy?

Frankly, I'm so sick of "he meant well" as an excuse. All it really means is "he screwed up."

You never NEVER say "he meant well" when someone makes the right decisions or is successful. It's an excuse for causing harm.

"He meant well" or "his heart is in the right place" hasn't the least relevance to anything short of standing before God on judgment day. It's value and morality based religion. Entirely so.

Maybe the left is compelled to brand everyone as a "good person" (Obama) or a horrible "bad person" (Bush) and then to pretend that results must, somehow, follow intentions.

That's anti-reason, anti-logic and (to bring this back to an earlier thread) anti-science.

traditionalguy said...

Victoria...Joe wanted to start a business. He is only as good as his hard work and intelligence will make him if he ever gets a chance to start that business. The Czars are a political operation that is extragovernmental except for their appearance of influence reward given to campaign functionaries, like being one of many honarary deputy sheriffs on the payroll. It has nothing to do with fascism. Fascism actually does work well at first by creating order, but it is an open door for a tyrant to take over and use it. There is no separation of powers betwen the businessmen and the fascist state. What if Cheney was President and he appointed the management and awarded the business contracts for Haliburton like, he was accused of influencing by the Dems during the Iraq War startup? Transfer that connection into every business here in the USA and you have yourself an efficient fascist state. Time will tell if Obama is just unable to figure this out, or if fascism is his plan for us.

Synova said...

Eli: "It seems that by now we've been chasing bin Laden for a long time, but we are increasingly unlikely to find him, especially with a big bulky army lumbering around.

That's not to say that we shouldn't continue to collect intelligence and maybe even launch air strikes and covert/special ops where we have particularly actionable intelligence but continuing to use the U.S. army to hunt down a few terrorists is like using a sledgehammer to cut diamonds. It's the wrong tool for the task.
"

I've repeated this because I think you're right on the money.

Firstly, because the chances that Bin Laden isn't dead, buried, rotted and dry by now is excessively small. Secondly, because he became irrelevant long before the last time we "heard" from him what was *important* was done long ago. He was removed from consideration in our fight with his followers... and likely more effectively than if he'd been martyred or hauled to New York for a public circus.

Sending armies after him or after the leaders who have replaced him is not what armies are good for.

That's not to say that there may not be other legitimate uses for armies in that region but if what they are *for* is misunderstood or they are misused it really is worse than not having them there.

All force is a tool to get the enemy to change his mind.

Not understanding that and not understanding in what direction you want the enemy's intentions to shift, means that chances are that no tools and no tactics will be the right ones.

Obama and others on the left have been talking tough for years and years about Afghanistan and Pakistan and particularly about wanting to kill a human being.

Only someone who doesn't understand anything at all would think that the murder of a single man means anything at all.

master cylinder said...

Trad Guy-all your points sink like a stone when you fly the Joe the P-Scarah flag. It's sad that you don't have anyone else to hold up as a role model.

vbspurs said...

JAL linked:

This nails it pretty well.

"Not while the Joker's in play", awesome. The cartoon should've stopped there, though the denouement was pretty good.

vbspurs said...

Kansas City wrote:

To the Bush haters, you need to let go of blaming Bush for everything. Obama dimnishes himself with his constant whining about Bush.

To the Obama haters, I think you need to accept that he is not trying to intentionally screw things up. He is in over his head and making mistakes, but I think he is trying to do his best (which unfortunately, is hampered by a very liberal/socialist mindset).


Now THAT, baby, was fair and balanced.

Cheers,
Victoria

master cylinder said...

agreed!
KC-that is the kind of thinking not always seen around these parts-or any other for that matter.

Arturius said...

That having been said, it's not wrong to point out that Bush's yes-men and enablers (Boehner, Cantor, et al) are many of those who are getting in the way of improving the situation right now.

I was unaware that members of a political party completely out of power could actually get in the way of an Administration whose party overwhelmingly controls Congress.

mariner said...

Kansas City:
To the Obama haters, I think you need to accept that he is not trying to intentionally screw things up.

Maybe not, but the people who pull his strings certainly are.

Obama is just a "clean, articulate" fence turtle.

Beaverdam said...

Florida,
I really really need to see your boobs.
Thanks