It’s not only Lynn Forester – a lot of people are just beginning to discover we are right when we say:
Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.
Democrat Brent Budowsky (an aide to former Sen. Lloyd Bentsen and Bill Alexander, then chief deputy majority whip of the House) once again is calling it as he sees it:
Recently The Jerusalem Post ran a brilliant and troubling piece by Amir Mizroch titled “Why everyone is saying no to Obama.”
Last Friday the president was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for doing nothing. [snip]
The Nobel Prize gets to the heart of the matter of the Obama presidency. The prize was not awarded to President Obama, but to the idea of Obama.
Voters may vote for an idea. Prizes may be awarded for an idea. But war and peace, prosperity and joblessness, legislation and treaties, illness and health, are not decided by the idea of the candidate but the actions of the president who is elected.
What made Roosevelt Roosevelt, Kennedy Kennedy and Reagan Reagan was that the idea of their persona during the campaign was followed by their actions during their presidencies.
NObama is what Obama backslapping-in-public smart leaders, not necessarily good leaders, say to a boob who is the Third Bush Term.
The Jerusalem Post piece was troubling because it is true. There is a pattern that others repeatedly say no to the president. Passing weak legislation and calling it a “W” does not change the pattern of his presidency or satisfy the powerful yearning for change that is not realized by promises, public relations or the cult of personality.
“Cult of personality” – that is a Big Pink term from 2007 when Dimocrats craved to get on board the Titanic with the boob. Big Pink also called Obama a “boob” in 2007 and we predicted the mess the boob would cause.
Virtually every player in the Middle East has said no to the president. Banks and Wall Street say no to the president. The Europe that said yes to the Nobel Prize says no to giving more support for Afghanistan. The president even snubbed the Dalai Lama in anticipation the Chinese would say no. The list is long of those who say no and short of those who say yes.
It is time to worry when “Saturday Night Live” makes fun of the president for achieving so little. It is time for alarm when so many power players believe this president can be rolled. Even a Senate where Democrats have 60 votes shows an almost daily disrespect for the president.
Boobs, like doughnuts, can be rolled:
The reason so many power centers, at home and internationally, say no to the president is that they do not know his bottom line. They believe he may shift with the winds. They know he accepts a tiny loaf while claiming a big victory. They believe he can be rolled.
Budowsky says pretty much the same as Lynn Forester about that “blank screen” which is Obama to his Hopium addled boobettes:
The president has described himself as a Rorschach in which others with divergent views project their views onto him. This is brilliant politics in a campaign but a disastrous approach to governing. [snip]
The centrifugal forces from inside Washington to combat theaters abroad revert to form in a divided nation and troubled world. Nothing of historical importance gets done.
The history of successful presidents is clear: They fight for major change. They battle complacency and resistance. They risk losing tactical battles for greater victories. They challenge and inspire supporters to fight great battles for great deeds and inspire fear in opponents who resist.
Remember how Big Media and Barack Obama mocked Hillary when she said she had “the scars to prove it” in regards to her ceaseless leadership to make the world a better place? Read that last paragraph and it describes Hillary Clinton, not the boob.
Rorschach presidents do not change anything. I pray the president will learn the lessons of history and his own experience, but when he does not, I must dissent.
Budowsky will not be accused of being “bitter” and “clingy” for his dissent.
Byron York cataloged the mounting “dissent”:
“Whiner in Chief,” reads the headline at The Nation, referring to President Obama.
Self-styled progressives across the country are angry, not just at Obama, but at the rest of the Democratic power structure, as well. That anger is causing an ugly split inside the Washington Democratic world. [snip]
NBC’s John Harwood recently reported that Team Obama views the complainers as part of the “Internet Left fringe,” and that one White House adviser said, “Those bloggers need to take off their pajamas, get dressed and realize that governing a closely divided country is complicated and difficult.” [snip]
Recent Gallup polling shows that Congress’ job approval among Democrats plunged in September, from 54 percent to 36 percent — an 18-point drop in the course of a single month.
There simply can’t be that many people in pajamas. [snip]
There are no precise polling numbers to measure the division, but for months now, Gallup surveys have shown that Obama’s job approval rating among people who call themselves conservative Democrats is 15 to 20 points below his rating among those who call themselves liberal Democrats. And now the liberal Democrats are becoming increasingly unhappy.
Even Obama blowhard and blower, Charles Blow, at the New York Times is in “dissent”:
When, Mr. President? When will your deeds catch up to your words? The people who worked tirelessly to get you elected are getting tired of waiting. [snip]
The fierce urgency of now has melted into the maddening wait for whenever.
Blow is upset at the Boob-in-Chief for weakness on health care “reform”. Blow, after fluffing Obama has other “dissents”:
On the same weekend that gay rights protesters marched past the White House, the president again said that his administration was “moving ahead on don’t ask don’t tell.” But when? This month? This year? This term?
As we prepare to draw down troops from the disaster that was the war in Iraq, we may commit more troops to the quagmire that is the war in Afghanistan and the government may miss its deadline for closing the blight that is the prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.
Obama pledged to stem the tide of job losses and foreclosures and to reform the culture of the financial sector. Well, the Dow just hit 10,000 again while the national unemployment rate is about to hit 10 percent. And the firms we propped up are set to dole out record bonuses while home foreclosures have hit record highs. Main Street is still drowning in crisis while Wall Street is awash in Champagne. When will this imbalance be corrected?
Candidate Obama pledged to make the rebuilding of New Orleans a priority, but President Obama whisked into the city on Thursday for a visit so brief that one Louisiana congressman dubbed it a “drive-through daiquiri summit.” The president spent more time on the failed Olympic bid in Copenhagen than he did in the Crescent City.
Big Pink was the first to call Obama the Third Bush Term. Now Charles Blow says the same thing:
At the town hall in New Orleans, Obama appealed for patience. He said, “Change is hard, and big change is harder.” Is that the excuse? Now where have I heard that before? Oh, yeah. From George Bush.
Big Labor is having labor pains too:
The president of one of America’s largest labor unions, Gerry McEntee, has emerged as a major obstacle to the White House’s efforts to maintain a unified front in the health care debate.
The veteran president of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) has crossed lines that few labor leaders – even those who quietly agree with him – would go near.
McEntee led workers in chanting a barnyard epithet to describe Senate Finance Committee chairman Max Baucus’s health care bill, which would levy a new tax on expensive health care plans. He published an op-ed in U.S.A. Today warning, in terms that could be used against Democrats in the midterms, that the plan could tax the middle class and cost workers their health care. And he blew off a plea from White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and published an open letter promising to “oppose” legislation that contained the tax – published over the objections, several labor officials said, of other union presidents whose names appeared on the letter.
Obama’s thugs responded to McEntee with insults.
But a spokesman for AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka stood by McEntee.
“We work closely with the White House and count ourselves among their strongest supporters,” said the spokesman, Eddie Vale. “Sometimes being supportive means staking out a tough position, and nobody understands that better than President McEntee.”
McEntee’s posture – and the fierce response from a White House determined to keep allies in line – reflects a broader dilemma on the left of the Democratic Party, which is feeling both lingering satisfaction at Obama’s victory and frustration at his caution.
Many Dimocrats are angry with Obama but are afraid of “losing the access and power” if they challenge Obama and his thugs.
McEntee knows a boob when he sees a boob. McEntee knew Hillary was a leader and ready on Day 1.
McEntee first angered the Obama camp during the 2008 campaign with his support for Clinton, especially in the early, demure days of the primary season, when his union mailed a harsh attack on Obama to New Hampshire voters, which asked: “How can we be sure the new President is ready?”
Randi Weingarten of the teachers union thought the McEntee language was too strident. That did not stop Weingarten from sounding like Big Pink when it came to “No Child Left Behind”:
A skirmish between powerful teachers’ unions and President Barack Obama over nearly $5 billion in education spending is shaping up as a preview of the battle to come over No Child Left Behind in Congress early next year. [snip]
The dispute adds teachers’ unions to a growing list of key Democratic constituencies that have been frustrated by Obama’s lunges toward the political middle, along with gay-rights activists upset Obama won’t lift the ban on gays in the military, and Latino officials who say Obama is slow-walking immigration reform. [snip]
One of the little-noticed aspects of Obama’s presidency is how much his approach to education mirrors Bush’s – heavy on testing and data-collection, with support for charter schools, teacher evaluations and merit pay. [snip]
“This administration doesn’t want to be ‘Bush Three,’ but some of the things that are coming out…simply charter schools and measurement… that’s what the previous administrations pushed,” Weingarten said, referring to Bush and his father, the president.
Watch the skid marks on teachers who drank Hopium:
“What we have now is a Democratic president who is using the words ‘fire teachers’ so the labor movement is starting to say they want to get on the bus and help steer, rather than get run over by it,” said Amy Wilkins of the Education Trust, a non-partisan think tank.
Hypocrite Dimocrats, like Representative Earl Blumenauer are lying to their constituents and continue to protect Obama while publicly decrying what they see.
The liberal Democrat from Portland, Ore. — known for his bowties, his Trek bicycle and a pragmatic brand of progressivism — embraced Barack Obama’s presidential candidacy early in 2008 and campaigned hard alongside him, steadily gaining confidence that the young senator from Illinois was the ideal liberal remedy to eight years of conservative dominance.
Now political reality has set in, testing Mr. Blumenauer’s faith that Mr. Obama’s election and big Democratic majorities in Congress would yield quick advances in the progressive agenda.
Even the garbage scow, Maureen Dowd, is sobering up from a deep Hopium drunk:
One singular leader who wrote elegantly about his ideals, was swept into the presidency and then collided with harsh reality had some advice for another.
In an interview with Alison Smale in The Times last week, Vaclav Havel sipped Champagne in the middle of the afternoon and pricked Barack Obama’s conscience.
Havel, the 73-year-old former Czech president, who didn’t win a Nobel Peace Prize despite leading the Czechs and the Slovaks from communism to democracy, turned the tables and asked Smale a question about Obama, the latest winner of the peace prize.
Was it true that the president had refused to meet the Dalai Lama on his visit to Washington?
He was told that Obama had indeed tried to curry favor with China by declining to see the Dalai Lama until after the president’s visit to China next month. [snip]
“It is only a minor compromise,” he said. “But exactly with these minor compromises start the big and dangerous ones, the real problems.”
Maybe Dowd is reading Big Pink because she referenced Obama’s treacheries in Illinois on health care, (while ignoring the Exelon treacheries on radioactive leaks to benefit his Big Donors) which we have written repeatedly about.
Yet Obama’s legislative career offers cautionary tales about the toll of constant consensus building.
In Springfield, he compromised so much on a health care reform bill that in the end, it merely led to a study. In Washington, he compromised so much with Senate Republicans on a bill to require all nuclear plant owners to notify state and local authorities about radioactive leaks that it simply devolved into a bill offering guidance to regulators, and even that ultimately died.
Now the air is full of complaints that Obama has been too cautious on health care, Afghanistan, filling judgeships, ending “don’t ask, don’t tell,” repealing the Defense of Marriage Act and rebuilding New Orleans; that he has conceded too much to China, Iran, Russia, the Muslim world and the banks.
Dowd has always been “bitter” and “clingy”. Now Dowd is approaching “dissent”.
Obama’s treacheries in Illinois have been well documented on Big Pink. Someday Big Media blowhards and blowers will decide to write about the dirty, not clean” screen – which is Barack Obama.