It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The most powerful man in the world seems strangely powerless, and irresolute, as larger forces bring down the country and his presidency.
The economy crawls, the credit rating falls, the markets plunge, and a helicopter packed with U.S. special forces goes down in Afghanistan. Two thirds of Americans say the country is on the wrong track (and that was before the market swooned), Obama’s approval rating is 43 percent, and activists on his own side are calling him weak.
Yet Obama plods along, raising gobs of cash for his reelection bid and varying little the words he reads from the teleprompter. He seemed detached even from those words Monday as he pivoted his head from side to side, proclaiming that “our problems is not confidence in our credit” and turning his bipartisan fiscal commission into a “biparticle.”
Obama … is the very personification of cognitive dissonance — the gap between what we (especially liberals) expected of the first serious African American presidential candidate and the man he in fact is.
"The Republicans feel they can keep pushing and he will keep giving," he said. "They have not seen a stiff resistance on his part."
"He was holding all the cards and he was still stared down by the Tea Party."
"He got gamed into making giant concessions, and this has weakened the presidency."
Can America still lead? Millions of people around the world had hoped in vain that Obama would restore the United States to a position of responsible global leadership. America's friends overseas … worry now about how strong Obama is, whether he will draw lines and if he can seize back the initiative."
Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world's largest economy, direct the world's most powerful military, execute the world's most consequential job?
Imagine a future historian examining Obama's pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League despite unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a "community organizer"; a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, so often did he vote "present"); and finally an unaccomplished single term in United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions. He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as legislator.
And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama's "spiritual mentor"; a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama's colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president?
To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers would have lasted a single day. But because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of liberaldom to have hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they were a bit extreme, he was given a pass.
"What Happened to Obama?" is that nothing happened to him. He is still the same anti-American leftist he was before becoming our president, and it is this rather than inexperience or incompetence or weakness or stupidity that accounts for the richly deserved failure both at home and abroad of the policies stemming from that reprehensible cast of mind.
He reminded all that the situation isn’t his fault (the need for deficit reduction “was true the day I took office”), he blamed the other side (“we knew . . . a debate where the threat of default was used as a bargaining chip could do enormous damage to our economy”) and he revisited the same proposals he had previously offered to little effect: extending unemployment benefits and the payroll tax cut, and spending more on infrastructure projects.
This, he said, is “something we can do as soon as Congress gets back,” along with further deficit reduction. “I intend to present my own recommendations over the coming weeks,” he said.
Over the coming weeks? As soon as Congress gets back?
Various reporters tried to elicit more information about Obama’s economic plans and deficit-reduction proposals, but Carney declined again to take the lead.
“I don’t want to get too far ahead of the process,” he explained to the Wall Street Journal’s Laura Meckler, adding that Obama “will be contributing to that process, not driving it or directing it.”
“Why?” inquired Politico’s Glenn Thrush. “He’s the leader of the free world. Why isn’t he leading this process?”
Originally posted by kro32
Of course if he wins another term he might do something more notable but right now he's looking pretty pitiful.
Originally posted by jdub297
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
[quote]The markets already have a major problem at the moment...that's scary talk!
Funny you should notice.
Many of the disappointed supporters noted how Obama hesitated almost 3 hours before the ealier-scheduled speech
finally came around; and when it did, the markets dropped like a rock AS HE SPOKE!
This, after he waited a full 3 days to address the S&P debacle.
Even Xinhua, the China daily, excoriated us for our lack of world leadership! ????
Originally posted by jdub297
Around the world and across America, people of all stations and walks of life are coming to realize that something has gone terribly wrong with their expectations for the “Hope and Change” of Barack Obama.
Although criticism from the right was to be expected, who would’ve guessed that only 30 months into his term as the 44th president, Barack Obama would be taking hits from Washington Post liberals, New York Times commenters and Harvard intellectuals?
You would’ve been declared insane if you’d asserted that Jesse Jackson, Maxine Waters and the Congressional Black Caucus would be outspoken in their criticism of the first black president; or that Black leaders Tavis Smiley and Cornell West would be leading their own cross-country tour openly challenging his policies.
As it would have been described in ancient prose, and as many modern Americans would’ve predicted, “the scales fell from their eyes, and they could now see.”
What is it that so many were once blinded to, but can now see?
That a student with poor grades, a man with no professional accomplishments, and a politician with no significant legislation is not qualified to be President of the United States solely because of his race.
That Barack Hussein Obama is failing as the first Affirmative Action president.
Dana Milbank, uber liberal political correspondent for the Washington Post made the striking observation last week, that:
The most powerful man in the world seems strangely powerless, and irresolute, as larger forces bring down the country and his presidency.
The most powerful man on Earth?
This wasn’t just some off-the cuff observation. Milbank described in detail Obama’s recent performance in the run-up to and aftermath of the S&P downgrade:
The economy crawls, the credit rating falls, the markets plunge, and a helicopter packed with U.S. special forces goes down in Afghanistan. Two thirds of Americans say the country is on the wrong track (and that was before the market swooned), Obama’s approval rating is 43 percent, and activists on his own side are calling him weak.
Yet Obama plods along, raising gobs of cash for his reelection bid and varying little the words he reads from the teleprompter. He seemed detached even from those words Monday as he pivoted his head from side to side, proclaiming that “our problems is not confidence in our credit” and turning his bipartisan fiscal commission into a “biparticle.”
Biparticle? What would the liberal MSM have done if a GOP or TeaParty candidate had said that at a fundraiser? Of course, that was never reported about BHO, formerly, “the One.”
One of Milbanks cohorts at WaPo, Richard Cohen, bemoans the fact that:
Obama … is the very personification of cognitive dissonance — the gap between what we (especially liberals) expected of the first serious African American presidential candidate and the man he in fact is.
www.washingtonpost.com...
Never mind that John McCain mocked Obama for "leading from behind."
Jesse Jackson also criticized him:
"The Republicans feel they can keep pushing and he will keep giving," he said. "They have not seen a stiff resistance on his part."
www.spiegel.de...
Harvard economist Kenneth Rogoff criticized Obama's concessions in the debt-ceiling wrangle.
"He was holding all the cards and he was still stared down by the Tea Party."
"He got gamed into making giant concessions, and this has weakened the presidency."
www.spiegel.de...
And the loss of leadership is felt around the world, as Obama sycophant E. J. Dionne sadly notes:
Can America still lead? Millions of people around the world had hoped in vain that Obama would restore the United States to a position of responsible global leadership. America's friends overseas … worry now about how strong Obama is, whether he will draw lines and if he can seize back the initiative."
www.washingtonpost.com...
So, how did we get to this point? What realization has come that has saddened, disappointed and enraged Obama’s staunchest allies and supporters?
That Obama was totally unqualified to serve in the capacity to which to was elected!
Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world's largest economy, direct the world's most powerful military, execute the world's most consequential job?
Imagine a future historian examining Obama's pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League despite unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a "community organizer"; a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, so often did he vote "present"); and finally an unaccomplished single term in United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions. He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as legislator.
And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama's "spiritual mentor"; a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama's colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president?
Obama: The Affirmative ActionPresident
So, if all that is true, how did Barack Obama get elected?
To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers would have lasted a single day. But because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of liberaldom to have hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they were a bit extreme, he was given a pass.
What happened to Obama? Nothing.
But wait! There may be another explanation, as offered by Norman Podhoretz:
"What Happened to Obama?" is that nothing happened to him. He is still the same anti-American leftist he was before becoming our president, and it is this rather than inexperience or incompetence or weakness or stupidity that accounts for the richly deserved failure both at home and abroad of the policies stemming from that reprehensible cast of mind.
online.wsj.com...
jwedit on 18-8-2011 by jdub297 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by The Sword
The "affirmative action" President?
And 6 flags?
Never has blatant racism been allowed to run amok on ATS than it is doing right at this moment.
You sir, are a blight on humanity.
As reported by The New York Sun: "A spokesman for the university, Brian Connolly, confirmed that Mr. Obama spent two years at Columbia College and graduated in 1983 with a major in political science. He did not receive honors..." In spite of not receiving honors as an undergrad, Obama was nevertheless admitted to Harvard Law. Why?
2) Obama himself has written he was a poor student as a young man. As the Baltimore Sun reported, in:
"'Obama's book 'Dreams from My Father,'....the president recalled a time in his life...when he started to drift away from the path of success. 'I had learned not to care,' Obama wrote. '... Pot had helped, and booze; maybe a little blow when you could afford it.' But his mother confronted him about his behavior. 'Don't you think you're being a little casual about your future?" she asked him, according to the book. '... One of your friends was just arrested for drug possession. Your grades are slipping. You haven't even started on your college applications.'"
3) Most damning to me is the president's unwillingness to make his transcripts public. If Obama had really been a stellar student with impeccable grades as an undergrad, is there any doubt they would have been made public by now and trumpeted on the front page of the New York Times as proof of his brilliance? To me it all adds up to affirmative action.
The "affirmative action" President? 6 flags?
Originally posted by The Sword
The "affirmative action" President?
And 6 flags?
Never has blatant racism been allowed to run amok on ATS than it is doing right at this moment.
You sir, are a blight on humanity.
The President Submits a Budget Proposal to Congress
Following the procedure required by the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, the President presents a budget proposal for the coming Fiscal Year to Congress on or before the first Monday in February.... usgovinfo.about.com...
...A review of White House budget proposals from 2009 to present reveals a series of long-term economic assumptions that torture credulity in service of Mr. Obama’s big-government agenda.
According to the fiscal 2010 budget proposal, released in February 2009 and modestly entitled “A New Era of Responsibility,” prosperity was just around the corner. The projected gross domestic product for 2009 was almost zero, but in 2010 the Obama administration foresaw 3.43 percent growth, followed by 5.23 percent in 2011 and an astonishing 6.26 percent in 2012. By 2015, this would level out to a comparatively modest but objectively unrealistic 4.45 percent, which was the default assumption out to 2019. These growth dreams were laughable. Without credible rationale, the White House posited that the U.S. economy would grow at a record pace for almost 20 years. This red-hot growth projection was necessary, however, to justify and cover the record levels of government spending Mr. Obama was planning.
White House long-term deficit projections were wrongly rosy as well. According to Mr. Obama’s first budget, the projected $1.2 trillion deficit for 2010 would be sliced in half to $533 billion by 2013. This red ink would creep slowly up to $712 billion by the end of the decade but would still be around 3 percent of the mammoth projected GDP.
Two years later, the economy isn’t producing the benefits Mr. Obama promised. Growth has been anemic rather than robust, and deficits have skyrocketed rather than receded.... prairiepundit.blogspot.com...
Never has blatant racism been allowed to run amok on ATS than it is doing right at this moment.
You sir, are a blight on humanity.
Barack Obama is now officially the affirmative action president.
This is where the perpetually outraged left begins hyperventilating, followed by uncontrollable screams of "racism." Water is wet, Hezbollah blows stuff up, and leftists throw utterly boring race-baiting temper tantrums.
Speaking of uninteresting, our leader is now an affirmative action project gone bad. This may have negative ramifications for future black Americans, which would be wrong.
So, where does this colossal sense of political omnipotence come from—the idea that, for him, every difficult or complex problem is really easy?
Here’s one explanation: Obama is the product of generations of affirmative action, i.e., because of enforced social policy most everything was really easy for him. As a result, Barack Obama is not likely the top performer he has—and we have been led to believe he is—and it’s showing.
Barack Obama is one of the number of useless, mediocre people who, thanks to affirmative action, have been elevated to a position far above their natural abilities. The absence of grades is not the only indication of Obama’s intellectual weakness. (And believe me, if his grades were good, they’d be published in every paper in America, including the want ads.)
Everything Obama’s turned his hand to — except for using people to advance his career — has failed. The Annenberg Challenge was a $100 million disaster. His legal career was, to say that least, undistinguished. (I should add here that junior associates always have undistinguished careers. There’s just not that much scope there.) His tenure as an Illinois State Senator was marked by dithering indecision, coupled with the intelligent strategy, for a stupid person, of simply vanishing when the votes came around. The same holds true for his career in the United States Senator. If you examine those two tenures in political office without the gloss of the media love affair, all you’ve got is plenty of nothing.
Obama’s professorship at the U. of Chicago law school was equally undistinguished. He published nothing. His disquisitions on the Constitution show he knows nothing. All that the liberals can hang their hat on is that one book: Dreams. And even that is proving to be a remarkably weak reed. Jack Cashill has argued compellingly that Bill Ayers was the book’s principle author.
All of which gets me back to Obama. None of the apparent indices of brains pan out: no grades, no job record, no book. Nothing at all. His sole talent, and I have to say that it’s a spectacular one, is to be a con man. He has a deep voice, good looks, and a network of behind the scenes operators who have been deeply invested in his advancement. The only problem with running a con, is that, if you stick around after you’ve run the con, people expect you to perform. And Obama, who has none of the advertised talents, is utterly trapped.
Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by DZAG Wright
Really? White Robes? Jesse Jackson and Harvard Alums, and fellow liberals are now all tossed into the same incorrect, illogical, and scathingly dishonest portrayal of KKK? It was bad enough when you supporters claimed any little criticism from the Tea Party was racism, but now you are going to claim that even criticism from his own party, and own race is still racism?
I'm at a loss. I don't even know how to respond to such drivel.