Originally Posted by BucEyedPea
You do relate to Obama's policy on healthcare. That BIG auto had to be bailed to protect people's jobs etc. etc. You don't relate to using those words but that's exactly what that is.
Frankly, I think Obama's restraint on Iran and the Republicans belligerent militarism, not helped by Bibi, is what is hurting the Republican ticket. It can't be the economy under Obama's stewardship that's helping his lead.
I've thought for awhile that this is 2004 all over again. Nice guy running against the New England rich guy who's out of touch that people just don't really want to be married to for the next four years. They know that things aren't going that great, but they don't know that the other guy's ideas are all that. So they end up sticking with the ass they know versus the ass they don't know. But you're probably right, I don't think anyone but the fringe could be asked if they're voting for Obama based on his stewardship and say yes.
What I will agree with Dirk is that this gives Obama an opening to further fuel his narrative and you can bet there will be tons of piling on (again, taking the comment out of context, but for a joke who cares?).
But anyone who's read the excerpts from Bob Woodward's book should know that Obama is in way over his head. And the scary part is that he's one of those guys who doesn't really have a clue, but THINKS he has all the answers. And when confronted by the facts that his ideas aren't working, he has a convenient line of excuses set up to absolve him of the blame.