Althouse: "Mr. Obama's was a White House that had—and showed—no respect for Republicans trying to negotiate with Republicans."

October 26, 2012

"Mr. Obama's was a White House that had—and showed—no respect for Republicans trying to negotiate with Republicans."

"Through it all he was confident—'Eric, don't call my bluff'—because he believed, as did his staff, that his talents would save the day. They saved nothing. Washington became immobilized."

Peggy Noonan, drawing on Bob Woodward's "The Price of Politics."

Also at the link: Noonan's analysis of the first debate and her basis for believing that the Obama we saw there was the "real Obama."

105 comments:

Matt Sablan said...: Well, he DID win.; 10/26/12, 6:57 AM
Dan in Philly said...: Yeah, pretty much this article agrees withy impressions of the man.; 10/26/12, 6:59 AM
mccullough said...: Woodwards book shows why Obama should have stayed a senator. Clinton worked with and effectively manipulated a much harsher GOP, and Reagan did the same with Tip O'Neill. Obama was fortunate to have someone like Boehner, but Obama blew it when he tried to get even more tax hikes out of Boehner after Boehner stuck his neck out.

The real Obama is the guy who gave a dozen speeches trying to convince the public of Obamacare and got nowhere.; 10/26/12, 7:05 AM
Sydney said...: I lost all respect for Peggy Noonan in 2008 when she went all in for Obama basically because he went to an ivy league school and because McCain's running mate didn't. Anyone paying attention to Obama in 2008 would have known what kind of president he would be. There was nothing in his history to suggest he was a good politician or a good manager.; 10/26/12, 7:07 AM
Saint Croix said...: I think the Obama in the first debate was far more likable and nicer than Obama in the next two debates. He was academic, disengaged, in his own head. But at least he was polite.

I think he was stung by the criticism that he lost that first debate. So he dropped the politeness. And then we saw the ugly Obama, the rude, interrupting, highly partisan, mean-spirited Obama.

And that Obama is Obama too! It's just one he usually hides under a cool facade.

Of course the ugly, rude, interrupting, highly partisan and mean-spirited Obama got cheers on MSNBC. So morons in the media said he did better in the second and third debates.

Not.

The cool facade is what passed for likability in Obama. Without it, he's not likable at all. Indeed, the only time Obama is likable is when he's with his daughters or his wife. Obama is obviously a strong family man. His best moment was when he sung that love song to his wife.

But as a partisan politician--or an aloof professor--Obama is not likable at all. Obama does not have the skillset to be likable in politics. Nobody likes him in D.C. And in all 3 debates we see why.

You watch those debates, and Obama seems like somebody who doesn't belong where he is. He should be with his family, writing books or something. Retirement would make him happier, and us too.; 10/26/12, 7:33 AM
Synova said...: Did Obama show no respect for Republicans negotiating with Republicans because he thought he was so skilled or because the the Democrats are a top-down authority structure and he automatically assumed that that is how people operate?; 10/26/12, 7:39 AM
pm317 said...: her basis for believing that the Obama we saw there was the "real Obama."

Big fucking deal. It took her how many years?

Many of us who paid attention to primary 2008 saw who he really was then.; 10/26/12, 7:42 AM
Matt Sablan said...: Synova: That's a good question, and one I've wondered about. How much of the political fighting is caused by different management approaches? The Democrat House, for example, was much different from the compromising Bohener House (within their own party.) Pelosi ran rough-shod over her own people; Bohener doesn't have that luxury because Republican House members are assertive and noisy. Bush reached out to work with Democrats, specifically Ted Kennedy on education, because he tried to build coalitions. Obama seems to assume that the coalition will build itself.; 10/26/12, 7:43 AM
vet66 said...: Barak "I wish I could use my middle name" Obama makes no attempt to disguise his support for a Middle East Islamic renaissance. Interesting to speculate that the drone attacks on the stars in his deck of terrorist cards help one group of terrorists over another. D.C. may not like him for good cause but it begs the question who loves him in the mahgreb? Dhimmitude is an insidious enemy.; 10/26/12, 7:49 AM
Anonymous said...: Even though she's late to the party, at least she's at the party. Just goes to show how much more isolated the Beltway is these days.; 10/26/12, 7:55 AM
Tim said...: This isn't shocking.

Obama's obvious, profound lack of experience was going to manifest itself in so many different ways once elected.

It did; he failed.

Oh-Bah-Muh, Oh-Bah-Muh.

Vote for Obama.

Double Down on Failure.; 10/26/12, 7:56 AM
Roger J. said...: one assumes that David Brooks and Peggy Noonan are the token conservatives invited to upper eastg side cocktail parties. Both are losers; 10/26/12, 8:02 AM
Wince said...: Reading Noonan's critique of Obama, although accurate, I couldn't help but say after 2008 "look what the cat dragged in".

In addition to everything said, Obama's lack of success is due to his out-of-touch view about how the world works.; 10/26/12, 8:02 AM
Dante said...: Obama of debate 1 reminded me of that Kangaroo Court hearing in which Obama allowed Republicans to explain to Americans why they did not like Obamacare.

The guy sat there, listened to Rs, and that was all he owed to all of us.; 10/26/12, 8:03 AM
Saint Croix said...: I think a lot of people voted for Obama because he was smarter than McCain, and articulate, and young, and cool (or emotionally disengaged) and had a great family.

And he was given the job like he was given the Nobel peace prize. It was a gift, out of racial guilt.

So for four years people on the right have been stuck with a wannabe socialist. And we watched, in grim satisfaction, as the country went down the tubes.

And the prospect of four more years of this economic madness terrifies us.

I fear a market melt down and massive unemployment. I fear inflation, and a Fed that can only raise interest rates to fight it, thereby making our debt situation all the more precarious.

I don't know if most people realize how dangerous our situation is.

Romney has down-played the danger. He's mentioned "we'll be like Greece," but a lot of people don't understand that reference. They don't know what it means to "be like Greece."

Large numbers of people know it's bad now, but they have no idea how bad it can become.

Leftist indoctrination is responsible for a lot of this. For instance, the idea that the new deal got us out of the great depression.

Smart liberals understand that World War II got us out of the great depression.

But even smart liberals are stupid on that score. They think it was all the massive government spending (and debt) from World War II that did the trick.

No. It was destroying Europe and Asia that did the trick. We had no competition. So the USA quickly recovered after the end of World War II.

This idea that liberals have, we just need to spend more money, and more and more and more, it's insanity. It's obvious insanity. You don't even have to be smart to understand it.; 10/26/12, 8:07 AM
traditionalguy said...: The meme du jour on talking heads TV is Romney has no specific plans laid out for creating 12 million jobs. (The real problem is that Obama has plans well laid out for destroying another 12 million jobs.)

That is all talky, talky talk. The Dems' problem is no one any longer expects much from a dictator with such a small personality as revealed in the Debate #1.

Romney simply proposes to remove the Government Planning element that has paralyzed the job creators. Is that a Plan?

Hide and watch!; 10/26/12, 8:07 AM
The Drill SGT said...: What Sidney said. Peggy has realized, 4 years too late, what 49% of the unwashed masses knew in 2008. Obama was all hat and no cattle, as they say in Texas...; 10/26/12, 8:09 AM
Clyde said...: There's a new Wizard of Oz movie coming out next year. Should November 6th not pan out for our Incredible Shrinking President, a role as a Munchkin extra might be in the cards.

Then again, as he goes smaller and smaller, a Munchkin might loom Mount Rushmore-like over him. Perhaps a Lilliputian might be more appropriate for him.; 10/26/12, 8:12 AM
Farmer said...: vet66 said...
Barak "I wish I could use my middle name" Obama makes no attempt to disguise his support for a Middle East Islamic renaissance. Interesting to speculate that the drone attacks on the stars in his deck of terrorist cards help one group of terrorists over another. D.C. may not like him for good cause but it begs the question who loves him in the mahgreb? Dhimmitude is an insidious enemy.

You are an insidious cuckoo.; 10/26/12, 8:12 AM
Unknown said...: Some people learn slowly, but at least they learn.

Right, Ann?; 10/26/12, 8:13 AM
Dante said...: Obama makes no attempt to disguise his support for a Middle East Islamic renaissance

Not to quibble with your main point, but what's happening in the ME is, in my view, PRIMITIVISM, alla Jacques Barzun's use of the term from "Dawn to Decadence."

I take it to mean the forces that attempt to return to a time that appears less complex. Re-adherence to fundamental principles that are known to work, perhaps shaking off some parasites along the way.; 10/26/12, 8:17 AM
Pete said...: What Hassell Anderson said.

Instapundit asks Noonan the same question we should ask Althouse: Why didn't it penetrate your radar back then?; 10/26/12, 8:25 AM
Dante said...: I think a lot of people voted for Obama because he was smarter than McCain, and articulate, and young, and cool (or emotionally disengaged) and had a great family.

I saw Obama for the first time a year or so before he announced, and I thought "That man is going to be president." He sounded so reasonable.

Unless the man was completely made by his supporters, I don't believe he is disengaged. The tactics he has used are those of a massively narcissistic dictator. The left leaning press has not pulled the curtain back from him. And I think they are a bit scared of the man.

Consider this. The major issue is the economy, but that didn't stop him from pushing through Health Care. Imagine what else he would have done if people were in a good mood, like under Clinton, no war, no terrorism, great economy, optimism as the internet took hold.; 10/26/12, 8:28 AM
George said...: I voted for Obama because McCain's stunt during the bank collapse (suspending the campaign and then going to DC to do...nothing) showed he was simply not presidential material.

I'm voting for Romney happily this cycle.; 10/26/12, 8:29 AM
trumpetdaddy said...: Noonan (and perhaps Althouse) is like the workers who came to the vineyard at 5 o'clock. I'm happy she's seeing the truth regardless of the time it took for the scales to fall from her eyes.; 10/26/12, 8:33 AM
Mark O said...: Obama is a nasty little man.; 10/26/12, 8:42 AM
test said...: Synova said...
Did Obama show no respect for Republicans negotiating with Republicans because he thought he was so skilled or because the the Democrats are a top-down authority structure and he automatically assumed that that is how people operate?

He didn't negotiate because he didn't have to. Democrats held the House and a veto proof Senate majority.; 10/26/12, 8:42 AM
Brian Brown said...: Through it all he was confident—'Eric, don't call my bluff'—because he believed, as did his staff, that his talents would save the day

What "talents" would that be?; 10/26/12, 8:42 AM
Matt Sablan said...: "I voted for Obama because McCain's stunt during the bank collapse (suspending the campaign and then going to DC to do...nothing) showed he was simply not presidential material."

-- Whenever people point this out, I feel compelled to mention this: McCain did not go back on a crazy whim. Harry Reid -asked McCain to come back to help reach a compromise and then promptly walked away from the bargaining table when McCain arrived.- The biggest mistake of McCain's campaign was trusting a man he considered was a friend would not stab him in the back to further his party's political power grab.; 10/26/12, 8:43 AM
Eric the Fruit Bat said...: Ms. Noonan deserves credit for having written that piece without having once used the word "asshole."; 10/26/12, 8:44 AM
Henry said...: What strikes me about Obama -- what has always struck me -- is how boring he is. He's tedious.

He acts intellectual but he never says anything interesting. He makes a show of pondering on big subjects, but he never gets beyond vagaries and abstractions. He's simply dull.

One thing I found interesting, following the debates second-hand via the transcripts, articles, and comments from friends, is that in two debates he said not a single interesting thing. People quoted Romney. No one quoted him. The only interesting thing he said in three debates was a single line of content-free snark.; 10/26/12, 8:44 AM
Brian Brown said...: McCain did not go back on a crazy whim. Harry Reid -asked McCain to come back to help reach a compromise and then promptly walked away from the bargaining table when McCain arrived.-

It is funny that Republicans never learn the Democrats do not make statements in good faith and in fact are habitual liars.; 10/26/12, 8:45 AM
Dan in Philly said...: Those who wanted to vote for Obama last time justified their choice after deciding by blaming McCain, Palin, or whomever.

Noonan has decided to vote for Romney and this article is her attempt to justify that decision since she voted Obama last time. She's covering her intellectual assets through after the fact reasoning.

The thinking goes like this:
1) I don't want to vote for Obama again.
2) But I voted for him last time.
3) Therefore I must have not truly seen what he is, and only now can I understand why I shouldn't have voted for him. He was too slick for me to see through, but now the mask comes off.; 10/26/12, 8:46 AM
Dan in Philly said...: "The biggest mistake of McCain's campaign was trusting a man he considered was a friend would not stab him in the back to further his party's political power grab."

Well, consider how bad a president he would have made with judgement that poor.; 10/26/12, 8:47 AM
Renee said...: " Romney has down-played the danger. He's mentioned "we'll be like Greece," but a lot of people don't understand that reference. They don't know what it means to "be like Greece." "

I have relatives in Greece, they tell me it isn't bad at all. "It isn't like we're Nigeria."

Yes, that is what my relative said.; 10/26/12, 8:47 AM
KCFleming said...: I was going to write "God help us if he wins", but such pleas are as empty as Obama's suit. Our spendthrift arrogance will collapse, as it always does, as it is doing in Greece.

And we will be forced to relearn an old, old lesson: you can't spend more than you make, not for long.

No person or family or business or state or nation can ignore this simple fact, no matter what bullshit some economist slings..

It's going to be very very painful, and the worst will be visited on those the Democrats and statist Republicans believed (or at least stated) they were helping.

Horrible people.; 10/26/12, 8:50 AM
roesch/voltaire said...: If anything this round of elections have shown us how this notion of the "real" person is complicated and some what fluid depending on the role and context of the situation. Is the "real" Mitt only a greedy person who desires power, yes in some cases, in other cases, say in the Mormon Church, he proves to be compassionate. To blame the "real" Obama for his lack of management skills seems to ignore the real Republicans who announced their primary goal was to prevent his re-election and proceeded to filibuster nearly every bill Obama introduced, which is why congress's approval rating is at an all time low, and why a few Republicans will be shown the door.; 10/26/12, 8:52 AM
exhelodrvr1 said...: Aunt Ann,
Please tell us the story again about how McCain lost you!; 10/26/12, 8:58 AM
Larry J said...: Oh-Bah-Muh, Oh-Bah-Muh.

Vote for Obama.

Double Down on Failure.

Obama 2012: Because 4 years of failure and corruption aren't enough!; 10/26/12, 8:59 AM
Matt Sablan said...: R/V: Why don't you consider the Senate obstructionist for killing most every bill from the Republican House? Oh no! Elected officials did what they were elected to do, that is, stop Obama's policies. He had a solid base of power when he was elected; with a few tiny concessions he could have either of the Maine Senators or Scott Brown side with him to break a fillibuster. He chose not even to make token concessions.; 10/26/12, 9:00 AM
exhelodrvr1 said...: Aunt Ann,
Please tell us the story again about how McCain lost you!; 10/26/12, 9:01 AM
Synova said...: "He didn't negotiate because he didn't have to. Democrats held the House and a veto proof Senate majority."

That was true at first but not at the point he had to deal with Boehner over the credit rating thing.; 10/26/12, 9:02 AM
kcom said...: "He didn't negotiate because he didn't have to. Democrats held the House and a veto proof Senate majority."

Which gave him a perfect opportunity to be magnanimous. At very little risk to himself since he had the numbers. But instead, he chose to publically be a dick. Which tells me that that's his natural inclination, and also tells me he's not very smart politically. If he had an ounce of Bill Clinton's political skill, he'd have a 10 point lead right now (because he would have undercut the Republicans by luring some to his side instead of driving them into cohesion and he would have avoided some stupid economic decisions that gave him the current economy he's forced to run on).

"and proceeded to filibuster nearly every bill Obama introduced"

Because every bill he introduced he tried to shove down people's throats. As Peggy Noonan says, the man has zero negotiating skills. He either throws the responsibility off to someone else or he bullies instead of listening and compromising. He took his position of strength and made it into a weakness. See above.; 10/26/12, 9:03 AM
campy said...: It is funny that Republicans never learn the Democrats do not make statements in good faith

They're not called the Stupid Party for nothing.; 10/26/12, 9:03 AM
Larry J said...: Jay said...
McCain did not go back on a crazy whim. Harry Reid -asked McCain to come back to help reach a compromise and then promptly walked away from the bargaining table when McCain arrived.-

It is funny that Republicans never learn the Democrats do not make statements in good faith and in fact are habitual liars.

It's Lucy holding the football once again. We'll see it happen again after the election when Congress tries to work out some compromise to avoid sequestration. They'll promise to cut spending in exchange for tax increases. But like every other time they've made this promise, the tax increases will happen but the spending decreases won't.

Go ahead - pull my other finger.; 10/26/12, 9:04 AM
Cosmic Conservative said...: The history of Barack Obama has been a slow, steady, embarrassing recognition by so-called "intellectuals" and "pundits" that Barack Obama was exactly who the vast majority of conservative Americans said he was when they first saw him speak.

My opinion of Barack Obama is exactly the same today as it was in early 2008. A sneering, petty, self-important, anti-capitalist, collectivist, neo-fascist ideologue and demagogue who is quite possibly pathologically narcissistic.

So what took me four minutes to see took Peggy Noonan five years.

And she's supposed to be some sort of brilliant analyst?; 10/26/12, 9:06 AM
Joe Schmoe said...: From the article:
Which gets us to Bob Woodward's "The Price of Politics," published last month...—hasn't received the attention it deserves.

Yah think?! If Obama were Republican, Woodward's book would be required reading in every school in the land. Excerpts would be read every half-hour on TV and radio networks, and blared on loudspeakers in public places. The Democrat hew and cry for not just impeachment but imprisonment would be loud and constant.

Now Woodward finds himself on the outside looking in on his former Democrat fans for the crime of committing actual journalism, not the expected advocacy journalism.; 10/26/12, 9:06 AM
Roger J. said...: Noonan--like her fellow faux conservative David Brooks writes a cya piece. if she was so fucking smart now was was she such a dumb bitch four years ago. Perhaps like the current ad she wanted Mr Obama to be her first. What a fucking loser.; 10/26/12, 9:10 AM
David said...: "He is not by any means a stupid man but he has become a boring one; he drones, he is predictable, it's never new. The teleprompter adds substance, or at least safety."

In other words, no original ideas. Not a critical thinker.; 10/26/12, 9:13 AM
Roger J. said...: Did I mention I am not a Peggy Noonan fan--nor am I a David Brfooks fan--just havent had to go off on him. Am sure sharp creased trousers Davie will end up making some sort of half assed apologia. In the meantime he can continue to fellate Elmer on NPR fridays.; 10/26/12, 9:15 AM
jr565 said...: The true shame of Obama is that he may be smart he has always been extremely aloof. He had no emotional intelligence at all. No warmth. You compare that to a Clinton for example, and you can see the difference between someone who can work a room and someone who seems uncomfortorable in his own skin. And with that lack of warmth was also a mean streak and a big heap of condescension. You can hear that in the debate where he says stuff like "they have these things called submarines" as if Romney wouldn't know. He can't help himself.

he's like a boring professor who never really engages with the students. For all the talk of his great oratory skills he's always struck me as boring as a speaker. No intonation whatsoever, and he sounds lie Bert from Sesame Street. And the soaring rhetoric that was offered up was pablum. I can't believe smart people ever bought intoit.
And it was extremely conceited to boot. It came off as messianic with his today is the day when the earth heals type shtick. But he attributed the healing of the earth to himself getting elected. That is some serious vanity.
In short, a cold conceited and arrogant leader. That was apparent on day one.; 10/26/12, 9:18 AM
Roger J. said...: jr565--dont know about the earth healing but I suspect our fellow citizerns on the east coast are about to find out the oceans havent receded. In all serious, I do hope individuals are taking precautions and have every best wish for their safety.; 10/26/12, 9:21 AM
clint said...: Is this what a preference cascade looks like?; 10/26/12, 9:21 AM
ricpic said...: Obama is no different than garbage, Montana Urban Schmendrik, hatboy, Alpha Liberal and Roeschi: full of arrogant ignorance and contempt for those who dare question the gospel according to Marx.; 10/26/12, 9:23 AM
Shanna said...: Whenever people point this out, I feel compelled to mention this: McCain did not go back on a crazy whim. Harry Reid -asked McCain to come back to help reach a compromise and then promptly walked away from the bargaining table when McCain arrived

Thank you for pointing that out, because I had forgotten.

I always think it's strange that people bring this up...in concept, the idea of suspending a campaign to work on a huge crisis seems utterly reasonable. Compare that to jumping on a plane to Vegas when you've had an ambassador murdered. Which is most responsible?

That said, I think people were mostly using that as an excuse to do what they wanted to do and vote again McCain. Republican's were never going to win in 08, regardless.; 10/26/12, 9:27 AM
test said...: kcom said...
"He didn't negotiate because he didn't have to. Democrats held the House and a veto proof Senate majority."

Which gave him a perfect opportunity to be magnanimous. At very little risk to himself since he had the numbers. But instead, he chose to publically be a dick.

I think you're mixing your thoughts.

Obama's goal is to move the country as far left as he can. Every compromise with a Republican sacrifices that goal. What about Obama makes you think being magnanimous is a goal at all, much less one worth sacrificing his other goals for?

Which tells me that that's his natural inclination, and also tells me he's not very smart politically.

I agree with the first part, less sure about the rest. Sure it might have gotten him re-elected, but then he wouldn't have passed Obamacare.

Obama's biggest mistake is that he believes leftist policy will work. He's acting exactly as you'd expect of any leftist ideologue who disdains anyone who disagrees with him as an uneducated bitter clinger, racist, or exploiter of the poor. There's nothing surprising about him or his actions.; 10/26/12, 9:33 AM
Larry J said...: People keep saying how smart Obama is but I don't see much evidence of his intelligence. One of the key aspects of intelligence is the ability to learn from experience. Obama's neo-socialist policies are essentially the same as those that have failed worldwide. An inability to learn from failure is a sure sign that Obama is not intelligent. It's true that he may be "book smart" so long as the books are left-wing. But he isn't intelligent and most definitely isn't wise.; 10/26/12, 9:36 AM
dreams said...: "I lost all respect for Peggy Noonan in 2008 when she went all in for Obama basically because he went to an ivy league school and because McCain's running mate didn't."

I lost respect for her too and the Palin derangement syndrome had the effect of outing some other supposedly conservatives as snobs, we expect that kind of behavior from the liberals.; 10/26/12, 9:36 AM
jr565 said...: Jonah Goldberg wrote:

Obama’s military rhetoric in the third presidential debate, was “an example of how thoroughly liberalism has confused sneering for intellectual confidence…"

That is so right. Acting like a snot nosed punk does nt make you right it just makes you a snot nosed punk.
Which is why the responded so well to joe Bidens blustery debate perfofmance. They think that, because he acted like a jerk that he won. No, he was simply acting like a jerk.
In ten years when looking back on the debates won't it be an example of one of the worst debate performances recorded? It would certainly rank up there with Al Gore sighing with condescension.
Libs SHOULD learn the lesson though they never will since they are libs.; 10/26/12, 9:37 AM
dreams said...: Obama is not smart and he isn't likable but it has become politically correct to say that he is.; 10/26/12, 9:39 AM
AF said...: Republicans complaining that Obama has showed them no respect is like the mob complaining that the feds lack scruples.; 10/26/12, 9:44 AM
edutcher said...: He didn't negotiate because, in Chi-Town, Demos don't have to.

They tell the Republicans what's going to happen.

Monkey see, monkey do.

Barry's problem is, he only thinks he's a tough guy.

PS Tried to wade through Noonan's piece this morning, but got bored by the drivel halfway through.; 10/26/12, 9:46 AM
Anonymous said...: Even if Obama wins, this election will have cost him dearly.

He will never be the same.

Every mistake from now on will stick - and there'll be plenty of them.

In America's mush-headed minds, qualifications only matter in sports figures where people care deeply about the final score.

But in party politics, we're as blind and stupid as a wood post.; 10/26/12, 9:46 AM
test said...: AF said...
Republicans complaining that Obama has showed them no respect is like the mob complaining that the feds lack scruples.

If leftist talking points had even a tangential relationship with truth leftists might occasionally have something worthwhile to say.; 10/26/12, 9:46 AM
Patrick said...: The news here is not that the President is not particularly bright, not an effective executive or that he's not even that likable.

The news is that Peggy Noonan finally understands that.; 10/26/12, 9:47 AM
dreams said...: "Is this what a preference cascade looks like?"

I believe that really applies to Obama, we're about to find out the voters don't think he is so smart or likable. Newt Gingrich say Romney will win by 53% to 47% and others who I respect think Romney is going to win by a good margin. He also thinks the Republicans will take the senate and if that happens the stock market will have a big time bull rally just like it did after Jan 1995.; 10/26/12, 9:47 AM
AF said...: "If leftist talking points had even a tangential relationship with truth leftists might occasionally have something worthwhile to say."

Marshal, I apologize for suggesting the conservatives lack respect for liberals. Clearly, I was wrong.; 10/26/12, 9:48 AM
Cedarford said...: Dan in Philly said...
"The biggest mistake of McCain's campaign was trusting a man he considered was a friend would not stab him in the back to further his party's political power grab."

Well, consider how bad a president he would have made with judgement that poor.

===================
McCain also had other serious problems.

1. He was war-thirsty in a nation sick of endless war not in America's own vital interest. He just wouldn't shut up about the need (with no allies) for war with Syria, more troops for Afghanistan and Iraq because the Noble Freedom Lovers demanded it. War with us invading Libya. He even wanted to send "Heroes" to assist the Georgians in fighting the Soviets. The worst was Iran - he kept voters informed nearly everyday that war with Iran was mandatory to help our Special Friend! And McCain also liked humanitarian wars. He talked of the need for US troops in the Congo, Liberia, Mali.

2. McCain wiped out his whole experience is critical argument when he picked Sara Palin.

3. He admitted he barely went near economic matters after the Keating Five, believing military and foreign policy matters were far more important and fitting of his attention.
One of his first proposals was to solve the mortgage proplem by seeing who had too much McMansion to ever afford and give them money out of a 300 Billion fund to put to equity. Of the people that had no mortgage or borrowed to buy a house at the level they could afford - McCain said they didn't need to be given money.; 10/26/12, 9:53 AM
edutcher said...: Quayle, HL Mencken comes to mind.; 10/26/12, 9:53 AM
SteveR said...: Obama's grand compromises were Stupak, Louisiana and Nebraska purchases. Only about getting moderates to go left.; 10/26/12, 9:56 AM
Matt Sablan said...: The reason Republicans were so harsh on Obama after his honey moon period is that we learned that ridicule is effective; blatant obstructionism -worked- for Democrats. They made it clear that politics is all about power, not principle. The lack of respect hit its heyday some time in 2002-03. I also said if we wanted a kinder, gentler politics, we needed to elect an actual uniter who had worked across the aisle on bills (both popular and unpopular) and not the guy who encouraged people to fight with their family and friends over politics.

Instead of picking the man who congratulated his opponent on his nomination day, our country chose the man who ridiculed his opponent for a handicap caused by being tortured.

So, yes, our country got exactly what it asked for, on the respect front.; 10/26/12, 9:56 AM
Larry J said...: AF said...
"If leftist talking points had even a tangential relationship with truth leftists might occasionally have something worthwhile to say."

Marshal, I apologize for suggesting the conservatives lack respect for liberals. Clearly, I was wrong.

It's hard to have much respect for people who call us Nazis, bigots, racists and every other vile name in the book, only to cry out about incivility when we return the favor. The anger conservatives feel towards liberals is well earned. You're reaping what you have sown.; 10/26/12, 9:57 AM
etbass said...: Amen, Sydney; 10/26/12, 10:04 AM
Cedarford said...: You have to wonder how America, probably for the better, would be if Bush lost in 2004. If the Democrats had picked Dean or Gephardt with an economic focus rather than the dishonorable and odious Kerry...to topple the blundering American Churchill.

Such a President might have worked to abate the coming fiscal and economic train wreck that Bush, eyes fixed on the NOble Iraqi Freedom Lovers - was blind to.

But not enough and with a Dean or Gephardt as bagholder for the Democrats economic catastrophe - voters had elected Romney to clean up the rest of the mess in 2008.

A better America, I think.

An alternate would be Gore elected in 2000. No Republican K Street corruption, no Iraq, no nation-building fiascos. And by 2004 voters would be sick of Gore and picked a fitter and more focused McCain, with a VP that had serious economic credentials to make up for McCains weakness in domestic policy areas.; 10/26/12, 10:06 AM
Baron Zemo said...: Obama deserved just as much respect as the Democrats and liberals gave President Bush. Not one ounce more.

Remember Chimpy McHiltler?; 10/26/12, 10:07 AM
cubanbob said...: Well R/V and AF come January you will see that payback can be a bitch. R/V you are right in that some republicans will lose a few seats but you forget to consider that those loses will be more than offset by democrat loses. If hope the republicans make no deals on taxes in the lame duck session and wait until January to first force real cuts in spending starting with 'entitlements' before getting to tax rate cuts. Let the blue states suffer the big tax increase to teach them a lesson.; 10/26/12, 10:09 AM
AF said...: "It's hard to have much respect for people who call us Nazis, bigots, racists and every other vile name in the book, only to cry out about incivility when we return the favor. The anger conservatives feel towards liberals is well earned. You're reaping what you have sown."

I'm not complaining about incivility. I'm asking conservatives to please spare us the bullshit about Obama's supposed lack of respect for them when they have shown him very little themselves.; 10/26/12, 10:10 AM
Aridog said...: The Farmer said...

"vet66 [excerpted] said..."Interesting to speculate that the drone attacks on the stars in his deck of terrorist cards help one group of terrorists over another ... who loves him in the mahgreb?""

You are an insidious cuckoo.

Nicely dismissive, eh?

And you, Farmer, are privy to some solid proof of a monolithic block within Islam? You know this how? Please share. Links would be nice.

Me? I'd expand it past the Mahgreb, however, because the historic divisions within Islam exceed it, not to mention the demographics globally which dwarf it. If you knew much about Muslim politics, and how and where we've intervened, you'd know that Vet66 has a point, relevant to both Obama's and Bush's administrations, ...one that can be substantiated. Begin your research with terms like: "Kurds" "Northern Alliance" "Sunni" "Shiite" "Salafist" and work on it from there.; 10/26/12, 10:18 AM
kcom said...: I don't think we necessarily have a disagreement, Marshal. I'm saying Obama made his bed and now he's lying in it. The Republicans didn't force him into that position. He chose it.; 10/26/12, 10:20 AM
Beorn said...: To blame the "real" Obama for his lack of management skills seems to ignore the real Republicans who announced their primary goal was to prevent his re-election

1. Clinton faced similar opposition, but co-opted parts of the Republican agenda to undercut their criticism and coast to re-election.

2. Obama didn't even work well with Democrats. He enjoyed overwhelming majorities in both houses. All he had to to was moderate a little to get Snowe or Collins to overcome any filibuster.

3. Obama took his eye off the ball (the economy) to settle 30 years of pent-up liberal grudges (Cap-and-Trade, Card Check, Health Care, etc). He is now paying the price for his negligence.; 10/26/12, 10:23 AM
Baron Zemo said...: It is not a complaint about a lack of "Civility." It is a comment on how inept and stupid the Jug Eared Jesus is in the real world.

I am sure Bill Clinton had even more contempt for Republicans than Barry. I mean they impeached them because of a blow job.

But somehow Slick Willie still managed to get enough Republicans to vote with him to get some stuff done.
Some Rhinos live for the chance to vote with the Democrats. It is so very easy to get them. Obama couldn't do it. He was too arrogant. Too cocksure.

He is a fool.; 10/26/12, 10:24 AM
Baron Zemo said...: Impeached him not them. Sorry.

Isn't cocksure a great word.

It is Titus's favorite.; 10/26/12, 10:26 AM
AF said...: "But somehow Slick Willie still managed to get enough Republicans to vote with him to get some stuff done.
Some Rhinos live for the chance to vote with the Democrats. It is so very easy to get them. Obama couldn't do it. He was too arrogant. Too cocksure."

Sure, Obama could have been more skillful. But ultimately, it was up to Republicans how they were going to vote. I just don't see how Republicans can blame Obama for the fact that no Republicans voted with him, particularly when they never offered serious compromise proposals on issues like healthcare reform or the budget.; 10/26/12, 10:27 AM
test said...: AF said...
Marshal, I apologize for suggesting the conservatives lack respect for liberals. Clearly, I was wrong.

Respect is earned. Honest liberals are welcome, too bad none comment here.; 10/26/12, 10:28 AM
avwh said...: "I just don't see how Republicans can blame Obama for the fact that no Republicans voted with him, particularly when they never offered serious compromise proposals on issues like healthcare reform or the budget."

AF: Obama couldn't even get any Dems to vote for his last two budgets. And the Rs DID offer proposals - Ryan had one that Geithner said, "we don't have a plan- we just know we don't like yours", remember?

And how about that bipartisan budget commission Obama appointed, then ignored completely everything they suggested?; 10/26/12, 10:32 AM
edutcher said...: Baron Zemo said...

I am sure Bill Clinton had even more contempt for Republicans than Barry. I mean they impeached them because of a blow job.

But somehow Slick Willie still managed to get enough Republicans to vote with him to get some stuff done.

Other way around. Newt could override any veto Willie wanted to impose, so, in the end, he had to do it their way.; 10/26/12, 10:33 AM
Larry J said...: 'm not complaining about incivility. I'm asking conservatives to please spare us the bullshit about Obama's supposed lack of respect for them when they have shown him very little themselves.

Politics is the art of the possible. The name of the game is compromise. Obama showed little to no willingness to compromise. "I won." Republicans were expected to cave to his will. When they refused, it was all the Republican's fault, at least in Obama's mind and apparently yours. Sorry, but that's not how things work outside of Chicago.

Obama is a failed president because of his arrogance and stupidity. It was his way or the highway. Well, come Jan 20th, he can hit the highway. I hope he doesn't let the White House door hit him on the ass on his way out.; 10/26/12, 10:36 AM
Aridog said...: roesch/voltaire ...you cite Republican truculence as a problem. How about a budget, a budget of any kind, in four years, two of which were Dem majority years in the Senate, yet Reid never once brought a budget to the Senate floor.

This administration has done something no other in the history of the US of A has managed to do....operate for four years without as formal appropriated budget.

And why not? Nothing allows more opaqueness in governance, and rule by edict, than perpetual Continuing Resolutions?; 10/26/12, 10:38 AM
AF said...: And the Rs DID offer proposals - Ryan had one that Geithner said, "we don't have a plan- we just know we don't like yours", remember?

Everyone has proposals. They didn't have any compromise proposals. I mean, Obama's big negotiating blunder was to embrace a bipartisan Senate proposal that raised slightly more revenue than what he had discussed with Boehner. Neither of these proposals would have made it through the Republican House.; 10/26/12, 10:44 AM
test said...: AF said...
I'm asking conservatives to please spare us the bullshit about Obama's supposed lack of respect for them when they have shown him very little themselves.

Let's just compare records of the last respective Presidents for each party. Bush's "compassionate conservatism" was an attempt to compromise with Democrats. He agreed to increase spending on education and healthcare, two areas where conservatives could generally agree that if we were going to increase social spending these are good areas to see it in. The result was two significant spending bills which Democrats had a great hand in creating. In fact virtually all of one was written by Democratic Senate staffers. The Democrats helped craft and implement the bills, then immediately attacked them as the source of all ills and tried to undermine both the bills and the President.

By contrast, when Barack Obama became president he crafted bills in secret after intentionally excluding Republicans even from debating the ideas supporting them.

And the nutty left concludes that Republicans are obstructionist? People cannot be this stupid. It must be an act.; 10/26/12, 10:44 AM
Cosmic Conservative said...: It's nice that Peggy has finally removed the blinders that kept her from seeing the real Obama.

But she still has the blinders that keep her from seeing the real Romney, or the real conservative agenda. She's still a pathetic tool of the elitist snobs of the Beltway.

And quite proud of it.; 10/26/12, 10:48 AM
test said...: I just don't see how Republicans can blame Obama for the fact that no Republicans voted with him

Who can convince themselves this is a rational description of reality? Republicans don't blame Obama for no Republicans voting for the policy. They blame Obama for enacting shitty policy. If you have to twist reality to make your point it's a pretty good sign your point is wrong.; 10/26/12, 10:49 AM
Synova said...: "Sure, Obama could have been more skillful. But ultimately, it was up to Republicans how they were going to vote. I just don't see how Republicans can blame Obama for the fact that no Republicans voted with him, particularly when they never offered serious compromise proposals on issues like healthcare reform or the budget."

And of course the definition of 'serious compromise' is?

It's every bit as easy to say that Obama never once offered a serious compromise. Boehner thought he had an agreement and he *had* given up substantial ground in some areas and he explained what he had to have in return in order to get the votes out of Republicans newly elected by Tea Party majorities. So they had an agreement, or Boehner thought they did, and Obama decided not to give Boehner what he needed for those votes after all.

And somehow this is Republicans being unwilling to offer serious compromise?; 10/26/12, 10:49 AM
Matt Sablan said...: AF: Much of Ryan's proposals were worked on with Wyden; several other compromises have been put forward. The view you are putting forward is one not based on any semblance of reality that we currently have.; 10/26/12, 10:51 AM
Cosmic Conservative said...: I seriously don't understand why you guys try to debate rationally with garage, inga, AF or the other liberal ideologues on this site.

It's an exercise in frustration that does nothing but give them the pleasure of telling themselves they've stuck another dart in a brainless, racist, misogynist, homophobist conservative.

You should understand by now that they are not engaging you. They are baiting you. Just like Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Michael Moore, Al Gore, Sean Penn, etc. they have nothing but contempt for anyone who disagrees with their collectivist, redistributionist, neo-fascist worldview.

The best thing to do with trolls is ignore them.; 10/26/12, 10:55 AM
Christopher in MA said...: To blame the "real" Obama for his lack of management skills seems to ignore the real Republicans who announced their primary goal was to prevent his re-election and proceeded to filibuster nearly every bill Obama introduced, which is why congress's approval rating is at an all time low, and why a few Republicans will be shown the door.

Feel free to point out the myriad times Democrats didn't scream, crap their pants, stamp their feet and block Bush's proposals every step of the way for eight years, RV.

And you can't use the Iraq war as an example of going along, considering your bunch of turncoats stabbed the army in the back the moment they realized they could.; 10/26/12, 10:58 AM
AF said...: "Republicans don't blame Obama for no Republicans voting for the policy."

Good, then we can agree that Peggy Noonan is full of shit.; 10/26/12, 10:58 AM
Synova said...: I mean... that's the subject of the post, right? Boehner had to negotiate with House Republicans. He couldn't just decide and roll over everyone. He had to work for each vote and had to figure out what he was able to deliver in the real world.

Which is a lot like the other thread about Romney's transition team and expectations that he'd be butting heads with Republicans in congress.

And then there was the other day and the poster here who insisted that Romney had no experience leading because all he ever has had to do his entire life was boss people around.

I sincerely think that this is about how liberals think about how "executive" function and I think they think, like Pelosi, that it's all about issuing orders.

And of course it's not.; 10/26/12, 11:00 AM
Christopher in MA said...: I'm not complaining about incivility. I'm asking conservatives to please spare us the bullshit about Obama's supposed lack of respect for them when they have shown him very little themselves.

As pointed out, AF, feel free to show us the "respect" liberals showed George "Retarded Chimp" Bush.; 10/26/12, 11:03 AM
Joe Schmoe said...: Synova, regarding Obama's negotiations (or lack thereof) with the Republican House, I'd add the possibility that his experience as a community organizer contributed to this. Back in 2008 Byron York wrote a prescient article about how Obama is fixated on worn-out progressive solutions to social problems.; 10/26/12, 11:07 AM
Baron Zemo said...: Oh of course Peggy is full of shit.

Anybody who voted for the Jug Eared Jesus is full of shit.

What? McCain would be no better? Maybe worse?

Honey Boo Boo would have been a better President than the Jug Eared Jesus.; 10/26/12, 11:15 AM
Baron Zemo said...: Honey Boo Boo would never had forced health care down the throats of the American People.

I mean she would have outlawed dentists.

Her family never needed them so why should we have to pay for them?; 10/26/12, 11:18 AM
Baron Zemo said...: Honey Boo Boo would never had bowed down to those dirty filthy Muslims.

She would have told them about girl power and how a girl could do anything!

Even win the pageant and get her own TV show!; 10/26/12, 11:20 AM
Baron Zemo said...: Honey Boo Boo would still have been way smarter than her Vice President Joe Biden.; 10/26/12, 11:21 AM
Baron Zemo said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 10/26/12, 11:22 AM