PDA

View Full Version : Obama Obama Strategy: Ignore Me, Look, its Bush!


HonestChieffan
06-03-2010, 05:55 AM
This is almost sweet. While his failures grow and voter dissatisfaction rages against both Obama and the congress, the Prez tries to deflect all the attention to Bush. That sure will work.

Ignore my abysmal record, ignore the way we have treated the electorate.

The vision for change is pretty clear...change the losers in congress regardless of political stripe and throw the brakes on this phony. I guess he doesn't quite get it.

You can almost see it now...a cardboard cut out of George sorta like a "Wheres Waldo" in every public appearance from here forward. In a debate, he will be gutted with his own record and his answer will be, Yes but Bush....

Jobs
Economy
Taxes
Deficit
Debt
OilWell
Israel

Oh my.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jun/2/obama-tells-voters-remember-bush/

Obama tells voters: Remember Bush
Sees election referendum on vision for 'change'

"By Kara Rowland 9:38 p.m., Wednesday, June 2, 2010


With his party's poll numbers flagging and crises testing his own leadership, President Obama said Wednesday that November's elections will amount to a referendum on whether voters want to go back to the policies of the Bush administration or stick with his vision of change.

In a starkly political speech at Carnegie Mellon University, Mr. Obama patted Democrats on the back for supporting his stimulus bill and other policies he said are leading to a recovery - while Republicans "sat on the sidelines and shouted from the bleachers."

Touting positive signs of an economic recovery, he also tried to rally core Democratic voters ahead of the election by reminding them how angry they were at his predecessor, President George W. Bush - a key factor in what some analysts expect to be a base-turnout election.

"As November approaches, leaders in the other party will campaign furiously on the same economic argument they've been making for decades," Mr. Obama said. "We already know where their ideas led us. And now we have a choice as a nation. We can return to the failed economic policies of the past, or we can keep building a stronger future."

Analysts described Mr. Obama's lengthy remarks, in which he repeatedly accused Republicans of political maneuvering, as a declaration of the White House's strategy heading into November.

"This was a huge speech and it seems to me what you're starting to hear is governors, members of Congress [and Mr. Obama] all starting to speak with the same voice, creating a clear narrative for 2010 and it's all about going forwards or going backwards," said Sean Gibbons, director of communications for Third Way, a progressive think tank.

Republicans say Mr. Obama, at 16 months into his presidency, now owns the economy and that voters should see better results from about $1 trillion committed to recovery programs. House Minority Leader John A. Boehner, Ohio Republican, called the speech proof that Mr. Obama has "run out of excuses for his broken promises on the economy."

"The president diminishes the office of the president when he resorts to straw-man arguments that willfully mischaracterize the views of others," Mr. Boehner said. "All of the president's talk of post-partisanship, reaching out and finding common ground reminds us that the country deserves better than his hyperpartisan speech today."

Democrats face an uphill battle by all accounts. A Gallup poll released Wednesday shows Republicans lead the party in power by a margin of 49 percent to 43 percent. The numbers mark the GOP's largest lead to date this cycle.

Gallup says such early generic ballot numbers can give a reliable indication of how the pendulum will swing this fall. For example, in June 2006 Democrats led Republicans 51 percent to 42 percent ahead of that fall's midterm elections, during which the party took control of both chambers of Congress.

memyselfI
06-03-2010, 06:21 AM
He's completely in over his head and overwhelmed thus he's acting a spoiled petulant child. His 143 days of experience is showing.

petegz28
06-03-2010, 07:08 AM
The whole blame Bush tactic has worn out its welcome.

Brainiac
06-03-2010, 07:12 AM
Is it just me, or is anyone else starting to think that maybe, just maybe, Obama didn't really have the necessary experience and background to be an effective President?

petegz28
06-03-2010, 07:18 AM
Is it just me, or is anyone else starting to think that maybe, just maybe, Obama didn't really have the necessary experience and background to be an effective President?

You can blame the MSM on that one. They never bothered to actually question his experience, his plans, nothing. He was to be the Greatest Amerincan Hero. He was going to put gas in gastanks, pay people's mortgages, give everyone $100k a year jobs, provide totally free world class health care, convert the world to solar power, etc, etc

Otter
06-03-2010, 07:31 AM
He wasn't Bush and he is black. Two birds with one stone. Welcome to the mentality of the average American voter.

stevieray
06-03-2010, 07:32 AM
not surprising, considering how intellectually dishonest people are about him.

....his "new" spirtual advisor is a Marxist.

Radar Chief
06-03-2010, 07:37 AM
Until it stops working I’d keep running Okoye up the middle too.

Chief Henry
06-03-2010, 07:41 AM
Is it just me, or is anyone else starting to think that maybe, just maybe, Obama didn't really have the necessary experience and background to be an effective President?

Ya think

banyon
06-03-2010, 08:48 AM
Well, that's funny. When you read the quotes, he doesn't mention Bush at all. I wonder why it was spun that way?

petegz28
06-03-2010, 08:55 AM
Well, that's funny. When you read the quotes, he doesn't mention Bush at all. I wonder why it was spun that way?

He blamed Bush without blaming Bush. Come on, Banyon. I know you is smarter than the average bear.

banyon
06-03-2010, 08:57 AM
He blamed Bush without blaming Bush. Come on, Banyon. I know you is smarter than the average bear.

Actually no, he didn't. He blamed the policies that Republicans are ACTIVELY ADVOCATING right now. It would be completely moronic to say "well they didn't work for the last 10 years, but we can't pay attention to that fact, they'll work now, just trust us! And you can't examine how any of these policies worked in practice!"

InChiefsHell
06-03-2010, 08:58 AM
Well, that's funny. When you read the quotes, he doesn't mention Bush at all. I wonder why it was spun that way?

"As November approaches, leaders in the other party will campaign furiously on the same economic argument they've been making for decades," Mr. Obama said. "We already know where their ideas led us. And now we have a choice as a nation. We can return to the failed economic policies of the past, or we can keep building a stronger future."

Guess he was talking about Clinton here then huh?

:rolleyes:

InChiefsHell
06-03-2010, 08:59 AM
Actually no, he didn't. He blamed the policies that Republicans are ACTIVELY ADVOCATING right now. It would be completely moronic to say "well they didn't work for the last 10 years, but we can't pay attention to that fact, they'll work now, just trust us! And you can't examine how any of these policies worked in practice!"

Dude, you need to wipe some of that Koolaid off of your chin...

HonestChieffan
06-03-2010, 09:01 AM
Well, that's funny. When you read the quotes, he doesn't mention Bush at all. I wonder why it was spun that way?


Like you are not spinning with this idiot move to deflect...God man, are you so tied to this clown you cannot admit he has been nothing you expected, nothing you hoped for, and the changes you wanted were never even attempted?

banyon
06-03-2010, 09:01 AM
Guess he was talking about Clinton here then huh?

:rolleyes:

He's talking about the Republicans that are actively campaigning on the same policies. He actually refers to them in your quote. Did you miss the part about " leaders in the other party will campaign furiously"?

Are you under the impression that Bush is actively campaigning and holds some kind of current leadership position?

petegz28
06-03-2010, 09:03 AM
He's talking about the Republicans that are actively campaigning on the same policies. He actually refers to them in your quote. Did you miss the part about " leaders in the other party will campaign furiously"?

Are you under the impression that Bush is actively campaigning and holds some kind of current leadership position?

Witht he way this guy points a finger at Bush almost on a daily basis and recent events such as Pelosi and others blaming Bush for the BP spill, you would think Bush was running again.

banyon
06-03-2010, 09:05 AM
Like you are not spinning with this idiot move to deflect...God man, are you so tied to this clown you cannot admit he has been nothing you expected, nothing you hoped for, and the changes you wanted were never even attempted?

I have been highly critical of Obama and have not supported much that he has done.

I do not indulge, however, dopey and dishonest criticisms that aren't accurate.

You seem to be under the impression that if someone doesn't agree with your dopey criticisms, that they must actively support the opposing position. That, of course, does not logically follow.

banyon
06-03-2010, 09:07 AM
Witht he way this guy points a finger at Bush almost on a daily basis and recent events such as Pelosi and others blaming Bush for the BP spill, you would think Bush was running again.

Yet he didn't mention him in this misleading thread.

HonestChieffan
06-03-2010, 09:13 AM
I have been highly critical of Obama and have not supported much that he has done.

I do not indulge, however, dopey and dishonest criticisms that aren't accurate.

You seem to be under the impression that if someone doesn't agree with your dopey criticisms, that they must actively support the opposing position. That, of course, does not logically follow.

No actually I respect your ability and training that allows you to try to make a point without actually making it. Much Like Obama did in referencing past policies...so that he can say he didn't say Bush. Hell you are both lawyers and trained in the art of using appropriate modifiers to allow escape when challenged.

My "dopey criticisms" aside, you are and have been a supporter and defender of the Clown in Chief from the beginning. Thats just pretty clear.

The difference between me and you is I am not afraid to state a belief without making sure I have covered my ass in some manner and added enough smoke and mirrors I can run and hide.

Your job is to make sure that someone is found not guilty or guilty as charged, not to define if they were innocent or not. Live in the gray long enough and the difference between right and wrong, real and imagined becomes hard to define.

petegz28
06-03-2010, 09:20 AM
Yet he didn't mention him in this misleading thread.

It's called being passive agressive

BucEyedPea
06-03-2010, 09:29 AM
Is it just me, or is anyone else starting to think that maybe, just maybe, Obama didn't really have the necessary experience and background to be an effective President?

Well, that inexperience could also prevent him from pushing through bad legislation. But then he had Pelosi for that. So that didn't pan out.

banyon
06-03-2010, 09:38 AM
No actually I respect your ability and training that allows you to try to make a point without actually making it. Much Like Obama did in referencing past policies...so that he can say he didn't say Bush. Hell you are both lawyers and trained in the art of using appropriate modifiers to allow escape when challenged.

My "dopey criticisms" aside, you are and have been a supporter and defender of the Clown in Chief from the beginning. Thats just pretty clear.

I voted for him, but since doing so, my posts in this forum have made it clear that I haven't supported much of what he has done. This includes criticism of the financial bailout, the stimulus bill, the health care bill, and his immigration comments. I have supported some minor ideas he has had (like the Glass-Stegall thread today), but not really anything major. If you can point it out, then link to it. Otherwise, it's probably like I said, you confuse not accepting dopey or invalid criticisms with "support".

The difference between me and you is I am not afraid to state a belief without making sure I have covered my ass in some manner and added enough smoke and mirrors I can run and hide.

Not really. The difference is that you state things without thinking through what you said, and then you attempt to deny you said it despite the plain evidence that you did so. Typically you duck out of the thread at that point (unlike today). I willingly defend and stand by whatever I say here, and if i make a mistake, I admit it. I can't recall you ever doing that in this forum. Your silly "Mexican congressmen" error yesterday would've been pretty easy to do that with.

Your job is to make sure that someone is found not guilty or guilty as charged, not to define if they were innocent or not. Live in the gray long enough and the difference between right and wrong, real and imagined becomes hard to define.

Actually that is not my job. My job is to ensure that justice is done. Prosecutors have a different ethical duty than defense attorneys. If I discover that there is not probable cause to prosecute someone, I dismiss the charges. I see plenty of gray in my job.

banyon
06-03-2010, 09:38 AM
It's called being passive agressive

Did he mention anyone? Didn't i already point out who he actually mentioned or did you miss that too?

mikey23545
06-03-2010, 09:41 AM
No actually I respect your ability and training that allows you to try to make a point without actually making it. Much Like Obama did in referencing past policies...so that he can say he didn't say Bush. Hell you are both lawyers and trained in the art of using appropriate modifiers to allow escape when challenged.

My "dopey criticisms" aside, you are and have been a supporter and defender of the Clown in Chief from the beginning. Thats just pretty clear.

The difference between me and you is I am not afraid to state a belief without making sure I have covered my ass in some manner and added enough smoke and mirrors I can run and hide.

Your job is to make sure that someone is found not guilty or guilty as charged, not to define if they were innocent or not. Live in the gray long enough and the difference between right and wrong, real and imagined becomes hard to define.

ROFL

Sweet Mother of Mary, you just nailed Bunion's ass to the wall.

petegz28
06-03-2010, 09:47 AM
Did he mention anyone? Didn't i already point out who he actually mentioned or did you miss that too?

Sorry, banyon, I guess given his history of finger pointing I am just not ready to take him at face value.

Pointing out the previous policies of the opposing party as he did comes across as an attempt to riase the whole Bush babble. Had he not pointed a finger at Bush on everything at every given opportunity I would see this differently.

HonestChieffan
06-03-2010, 09:50 AM
Somewhere between spinning, you do that moderately well; trying to change the direction through strawmen and misdirection, something you do less well because its so obvious, you seem to move to rationalization.

Your consistent need to request a link is tedious, old, tired. Get over it.

You wouldn't know my thought process if it happened in front of you. Its a matter of strong beliefs, core values, experience, and opinions that I am not ashamed to state. No, sometimes I let her fly as they say. And your usual approach is to not really try to get the point or seek any understanding. Your mode of operation is to move to smartypants snarky...lord knows you do that enough. Its the message board version of trying to undermine a witness without direct confrontation. Innuendo and leaving the unanswered question. Decent tactic if you have nothing else but generally weak and underwhelming.

While I'm willing to state my opinion and my feelings, you hide behind subtle turn of a phrase. Where I may call it a Mexican, you claim to be anti illegal immigrant but never really take a stand. Thats cool, I don't care if thats your pose, but recognize wearing your little mask fools only those not smart enough to see it for what it is.

banyon
06-03-2010, 10:11 AM
While I'm willing to state my opinion and my feelings, you hide behind subtle turn of a phrase. Where I may call it a Mexican, you claim to be anti illegal immigrant but never really take a stand. Thats cool, I don't care if thats your pose, but recognize wearing your little mask fools only those not smart enough to see it for what it is.

This all exists only in your addled head. You think i haven't taken stands in this forum against illegal immigration?

If you're too lazy to link, then why don't you just generally refer to the Obama programs/initiatives I have supported since he has been in office?

go bowe
06-03-2010, 12:24 PM
not surprising, considering how intellectually dishonest people are about him.

....his "new" spirtual advisor is a Marxist.i thought the old spiritual adviser was a marxist...

aren't there any capitalist spiritual advisers from chicago?

HonestChieffan
06-03-2010, 12:25 PM
i thought the old spiritual adviser was a marxist...

aren't there any capitalist spiritual advisers from chicago?

George Halas but only a select few can be in communication with him

go bowe
06-03-2010, 12:27 PM
No actually I respect your ability and training that allows you to try to make a point without actually making it. Much Like Obama did in referencing past policies...so that he can say he didn't say Bush. Hell you are both lawyers and trained in the art of using appropriate modifiers to allow escape when challenged.

My "dopey criticisms" aside, you are and have been a supporter and defender of the Clown in Chief from the beginning. Thats just pretty clear.

The difference between me and you is I am not afraid to state a belief without making sure I have covered my ass in some manner and added enough smoke and mirrors I can run and hide.

Your job is to make sure that someone is found not guilty or guilty as charged, not to define if they were innocent or not. Live in the gray long enough and the difference between right and wrong, real and imagined becomes hard to define.damn, i knew i shouldn't have skipped that course... :( :( :(

go bowe
06-03-2010, 12:32 PM
Somewhere between spinning, you do that moderately well; trying to change the direction through strawmen and misdirection, something you do less well because its so obvious, you seem to move to rationalization.

Your consistent need to request a link is tedious, old, tired. Get over it.

You wouldn't know my thought process if it happened in front of you. Its a matter of strong beliefs, core values, experience, and opinions that I am not ashamed to state. No, sometimes I let her fly as they say. And your usual approach is to not really try to get the point or seek any understanding. Your mode of operation is to move to smartypants snarky...lord knows you do that enough. Its the message board version of trying to undermine a witness without direct confrontation. Innuendo and leaving the unanswered question. Decent tactic if you have nothing else but generally weak and underwhelming.

While I'm willing to state my opinion and my feelings, you hide behind subtle turn of a phrase. Where I may call it a Mexican, you claim to be anti illegal immigrant but never really take a stand. Thats cool, I don't care if thats your pose, but recognize wearing your little mask fools only those not smart enough to see it for what it is.damn, i must have skipped that course too... :( :( :(

go bowe
06-03-2010, 12:33 PM
George Halas but only a select few can be in communication with him:LOL: :LOL: :LOL:

The Mad Crapper
06-29-2010, 06:13 AM
http://www.moonbattery.com/Bamboozled-By-Duh.jpg