Obama Uses Bully Pulpit to Demand End of Political Rhetoric

|

that's his rhetoric face

President Barack Obama continues his war on political rhetoric—well, other people's rhetoric—in a press conference today about debt ceiling negotiations:

"It's my hope that everybody is gonna leave their ultimatums at the door, that we'll all leave our political rhetoric at the door." 

I'm adding this one to my collection of "do as I say, not as I do" injunctions from the prez, who is at his rhetorical best when accusing others of being at their rhetorical worst.

Remember his inaugural address, when people the president disagrees with state their deeply held political beliefs and therefore become "cynics" unwilling to part with "the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long"? Or during the health care debate when "cynics and the naysayers continue[d] to exploit fear and concerns for political gain"

Play along at home! Add your own! Collect 'em all!

Advertisement

NEXT: Lukewarmers, Denialists, and Other Climate Change Skeptics

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. It’s almost to the point where you wonder if Obama really believes what he says anymore.

    1. Go easy on the guy, he doesn’t know what he’s going to believe until it rolls up the teleprompter.

    2. I crossed that point after the promise to filibuster against unwarranted wiretapping immunity turned into a vote for unwarranted wiretapping immunity.

      On the other hand, when’s the last time we had a president who *never* told any bold-faced lies? Maybe Truman?

  2. On the list of Worst Presidents Ever, where does this one rank? Top 5?

    1. I think so. He’s godawful, wherever he ranks.

    2. For some reason, I’d still rank Bush above Obama on the list, if only for the reason that he laid the groundwork the Great One’s epic clusterfuckitude.

      1. He’s Bush+, so that makes him worse. Setting bad precedents is what presidents do. Each building on the last until Emperor Chasity Bono is what we end up with.

        1. No, it will end with President Sean Penn, who’s first order of business is passing a law making war “illegal”.

          1. No way he’s beating Bono.

            1. No way in hell that people are going to forget No Line on the Horizon. No fucking way.

              1. See, she wins on so many levels. Lesbian. Nostalgia for The Sonny and Cher Comedy Hour. Confusion with Bono. Daughter of celebrities and a politician.

                1. all fucked up. She’s a he and his name is Chaz.

                  1. Well, that leaves a lot of questions to be answered.

                    If, say, if you are a dude and you had a crush on Chastity back in the 90’s, and you rubbed one out every now and then thinking of her, that would be clearly a heterosexual act, right?

                    If you decided to rub one out now, for say a retro remembrance sake thing, that would be a homosexual act?

                    By that logic, would rubbing one out to an old Farrah Fawcett poster be a necrophalic act?

                    Is it entirely dependent on if you were thinking of Chastity, or if you were thinking of Chaz when you rubbed one out whether the act is gay or straight? But it is the same fucking person?!?

                    1. I think “rubbing one out” is a sin, so asking the question is sinful and not subject to answer.

                    2. Well, then, save yourself, and never jag off* again! I’m beyond hope.

                      *needed varying up, the ‘rubbing one out’ phrase got a little stiff (see what I did there?).

          2. Which would be fine. Exept the next 3.5 years of his administration would be declaring a “war on such and such”.

            Because that’s just what liberals do.

        2. Chasity Bono doesn’t exist. There is a guy name Chaz somewhere, living off of daddy’s trust fund.

          1. Actually, she / he has a fairly popular restaurant here in Long Beach. I went there two weeks ago. Bad food. Terrible service.

    3. Obama’s like Bush, but WORST. Think about that when you’re ranking.

    4. Careful. He might legalize gay marriage and announce a $100B program to fund embryonic stem cell research, in which case CATO and Reason are likely to forgive him completely.

      1. Oh, like you’ve never sold out before.

    5. You really shouldn’t rank presidents until they’ve been out of office for 40 years or more. Otherwise you get these silly lists where the current and immediately previous presidents are either best or worst.

      1. I actually agree. He may be the worst of my lifetime, though Nixon was pretty bad.

        He’s fucking awful is really the only standard that matters, regardless of where he ranks when historians are documenting the decline and fall of the American empire.

      2. it hurts the meme, but I do agree. He’s 3 years into a presidency. Bush had a full 8. FDR had 12. So, at least let him finish out his term before we declare him the worst ever. Jan 22, 2013, I’ll post my list of worst ever. President Palin will probably top the list, after an inaugural speech replete with “doncha know”s and “you betcha”s.

        1. So far, he’s on pace to be one of the worst ever. Is that acceptable to all the pedants?

          1. yeah, kind of like in the Olympics, how they show the time vs. the leader clock and then the guy stumbles at the end and ends up in 15th place. Hey, maybe he’ll eliminate the TSA before he’s done. Not holding out hope, but you have to give him a fair change before you compare him to guys from 100+ years ago.

            Did I say he’s on pace for worst ever? He’s on pace for worst ever, but there’s some real shit too overcome to win that award.

    6. Of my lifetime, he’s the worst.

      Granted, I don’t remember Nixon all that well, but Obama makes Carter look good.

      Buchanan’s still the worst evar, but that’s only because being blamable for the Civil War is hard to beat.

      1. Lincoln was the one who started the war. It will be hard to knock Lincoln, FDR and Wilson out of the three way tie for worst president ever.

        1. I don’t know that Lincoln started the war. The war begun in reaction to him, not what he did. And he did free the slaves, and he did (finally) pick a general who could kick some ass and end the war. Yeah, there was a little event where some cities in Georgia had a small fire and a few people did suffer from a lack of habeus corpus but what’re you going to do?

          1. suffice to to say, there is no way Lincoln is bottom 3. Most historians (eggheads who read too much) rank him top 3 or 5 easily, I don’t know that I can dispute that much (not having read extensively on all presidents).

            And remember in ranking presidents, Washington had it easy, nothing to grade him by.

            1. —“That on the first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, all persons held as slaves within any State or designated part of a State, the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United States, shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free”—

          2. —“And he did free the slaves”—

            The Emancipation Proclamation only applied to the States that were in rebellion, not all slaves were freed.

            1. Reverse the order of the above posts

            2. sorry I’m not a constutional scholar. But were there any legal slaves in April 1865? Answer me that Oliver Wendell.

              1. and since I’m such a dumb ass, you don’t expect me to spell Constitutional correctly, do you. TOO MUCH PRESSURE

                1. —“sorry I’m not a constutional scholar. But were there any legal slaves in April 1865? Answer me that Oliver Wendell.”—

                  —“and since I’m such a dumb ass, you don’t expect me to spell Constitutional correctly, do you. TOO MUCH PRESSURE”—

                  I wasn’t calling you out on anything. I was just pointing out the commonly held mis-perception that the Emancipation Proclamation freed all of the slaves.

              2. Legally, the last 40,000 or so slaves were freed in Kentucky[111] by the final ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution in December 1865. Slaves still held in Tennessee, Kentucky, Kansas, New Jersey, Delaware, West Virginia, Maryland, Missouri, Washington, D.C., and twelve parishes of Louisiana[112] also became legally free on this date.

              3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S…..#Civil_War

                Legally, the last 40,000 or so slaves were freed in Kentucky by the final ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution in December 1865. Slaves still held in Tennessee, Kentucky, Kansas, New Jersey, Delaware, West Virginia, Maryland, Missouri, Washington, D.C., and twelve parishes of Louisiana also became legally free on this date.

                1. fuck me. I don’t know everything.

            3. And it was purely a political ploy, intended to remind the Europeans who might be considering intervening in our little family squabble that those evil southerners had slaves.

              1. but apparently it worked as after the war, there were no slaves

              2. purely? I was told it was an attempt to deprive the south of labor. Wouldn’t it have been a bit late in the war to be worrying about the Europeans?

                1. The EP had no immediate effect since it only applied to areas that the union didn’t control.

                  Britain was considering intervening on the South’s behalf as (a) they didn’t enjoy having their cotton supplies interrupted by the Union blockade, and (b) a Southern victory would weaken the US as a competitor in the Pacific.

                  1. Tulpa, to put not too fine a point on it, the British had bigger fish to fry at the time with Napoleon III and Bismarck running around Europe at the time.

      2. I don’t remember Nixon all that well

        I don’t remember Chester A. Arthur. That’s why we have history books.

        1. My point was that I was alive for Nixon. My earliest political memory was watching the Watergate hearings on TV, so I can’t really judge by personal experience.

    7. He’ll always be #1 to me.

      1. well, you look like #2 to me.

      2. Yeah, Nixon’s the one.

        At least LBJ declared war on things that aren’t fun at all, like poverty. Nixon had to go and declare war on drugs.

    8. So, he’s horrible because he’s trying to fix the retarded mistakes from the Bush administration?

      Good god, you people are morons.

      1. More hopium and co-change for Mr. Interesting, please.

        To be fair, he changed the $500 billion deficits to $1.5 trillion and the two wars became three. So he’s clearly all about making a big effort.

        1. Hope and Change, baby, all the way down.

          Hope and Change.

      2. So “fix” is now a cognate of “expanding”? I learn something new every day.

      3. Who’s going to fix Obama’s retarded mistakes?

      4. You mean “actively perpetuate the retarded mistakes from the Bush administration”?

        1. Oh, Obama’s just as good as making retarded mistakes as Bush was.

          Possibly better, in some ways.

    9. He’s worse than Bush, but he’s still far behind assholes like Wilson or Nixon.

      -jcr

  3. I’m surprised people even listen to this guy anymore. He’s not even up to the point of merely being full of shit.

    Frankly, I’d have some respect for the GOP if they’d stick to their supposed guns and refuse to budge on requiring cuts in spending without tax hikes. They aren’t proposing anywhere near enough reductions in spending, but caving on what little they are proposing is sickening.

    1. Partisans are fucking stupid, ProL. Really, really stupid. Don’t expect them to wise up just because they’re being lied to again and again.

      1. You abuse the privilege, suh.

        1. I think bitching about partisanship trumping everything of actual importance is perfectly fine. We’ve been doing it since George Washington’s Farewell Address. And that’s only in the U.S.

    2. Principally because Team Red doesn’t have the guts to really push for the cuts that are needed.

      Touch medicare? Team Red is too chicken.
      Touch social security? Team Red is too chicken.
      Touch the WoD? Team Red is all for the WoD.
      Touch ag subsidies? What, and lose the Iowa caucuses?
      Touch military spending? Corporate donors and “America, YEAH!” knuckle-draggers would never allow it.

      The GOP’s only mantra is “Cut Taxes”. While I would like to see lower taxes, I will point out that deficit spending is just a tax on next year.

      1. Jesus. Make me dictator (in the Roman Republic sense) for six months, and I’ll fucking cut this government in ways that will make the parties’ leadership swoon and gasp for air.

        1. They’re already swooning and gasping for air, and they haven’t cut anything yet!

          1. The cowardice of the current generation of politicians is amazing.

            1. Sometimes I can’t blame the fear of cuts.

              Hell, you propose cuts to bus service on rural routes where no one lives, and immediately there’s a reporter on the phone, calling everyone in the community to find out where there’s a little old lady with gout who depends on that bus service once a fortnight, and alas won’t make it to her bridge game, depriving her of the life-giving nectar of social contact, essentially killing her.

              1. End of the day, it’s a matter of how much you give a crap about our future. Is political office so important that you’ll allow our economy to really derail? Sadly, that’s a rhetorical question for most in office, because their answer is yes.

                1. End of the day, it’s a matter of how much you give a crap about our future. Is political office so important that you’ll allow our economy to really derail?

                  As long as you have plausible deniability, then… yeah.

        2. Lucius Cornelius Pro Libertate?

          1. Lucius Quinctius Libertatus.

            1. I, on the other hand, would go for Aresen Octavius Ceasar Augustus.

              (If I got corrupt enough to go for power, I might as well go for the whole swag.)

              1. As far as emperors go, there are worse choices.

                1. I’d vote for you.

                  If we got to vote for Emperors. I’ll support you in the Senate! And in the streets! Hail Lucius Quinctius Libertatus!! Hail Lucius Quinctius Libertatus!!

                  *commences sidebar with Brutus*

        3. These being the words of Marcus Julius Cicero:

          “You are certainly not without accomplishments: it is a rare man who can boast of becoming a bankrupt before even coming of age. You have brought upon us war, pestilence and destruction. You are America’s Helen of Troy. But then…a woman’s role has always suited you best.”

    3. I’m surprised people even listen to this guy anymore. He’s not even up to the point of merely being full of shit.

      If the republic survives, 100 years from now people are initially going to wonder how this whiny little bitch was ever taken seriously as a leader.

      Then they’re going to put it in the context of modern PC culture and SWPL faggotry, and it will make complete sense.

      1. Petulant is the word you are looking for.

        It is what happens to a child raised by his grandparents; he really hasn’t developed enough to be wearing long pants.

  4. I’d say he ranks just a hair above Nixon and LBJ. For the moment, he and Bush 43 are tied for 3rd worst prez. Alas, he has, at a minimum, 18 months left to shoot to the bottom of that oily barrel of excrescence.

    1. Hmmm, I gotta say Buchanan is worse than Nixon or LBJ.

      1. Was. Being dead and all.

      2. The immorality of slavery aside, Buchannan had the misfortune of standing on untreaded ground. In 1860 no one knew whether or not secession was permissible. Lincoln was elected by religious zealots that wanted to end slavery, so he was more forceful on the matter.

    2. Worst prezs:

      1) FDR

      2) Wilson

      3) LBJ

      4) T. Roosevelt and Obama (tie)

      6) Nixon and Carter (tie)

      1. All from after 1900? That’s some serious recentism.

        Polk was a pretty heinous president, as was John Adams.

        1. Polk was no saint, but at least he accomplished everything he said he was going to as President, including only serving one term.

          If you’re measuring him in terms of libertarian or moralistic principles, yeah, he was pretty awful. But at least he never promised that his massive spending plan would prevent unemployment from getting worse, only to have reality intrude, and the army actually won the wars he started.

      2. Oh, and Carter wasn’t that bad either. He was just in the wrong place at the wrong time during our long national detox after the LBJ/Nixon years.

        1. He was horrible… horrible on foreign policy.

        2. Wilson is a no-brainer: The Fed and WWI. FDR too: New Deal and WWII.

          Everyone else is debatable, and I think the recentism makes sense, considering that the size and scope of the federal government has only increased throughout the history of the U.S., and the ones responsible for the biggest jumps should be considered the worst.

          Still, I’d take Teddy, Carter, and Johnson off the list, and maybe add Bush the Jr. to it.

          1. Kennedy was actually pretty bad, he just died young and beautiful which is in many ways, more important than anything else.

            But when you get into the nuts and bolts of his policy, he was either weak or incompetent. I mean, Bay of Pigs, really? Then he got us into Vietnam, which means that Johnson was to Kennedy what Obama is to Bush.

            1. Oh, this reminded me of a book I’ve been meaning to read, but haven’t yet: Recarving Rushmore: Ranking the Presidents on Peace, Prosperity, and Liberty by Ivan Eland. Basically reorders them along criteria most here would find far superior to those typically used when discussing such things.

            2. Ike actually got us into Nam in 1957, though JFK did escalate our involvement. He did OK during the missile crisis though, which somewhat makes up for his standing idly by while the Soviets built the Berlin Wall in blatant violation of the Allied treaties regarding occupied Germany.

      3. I’d have to give Carter a few more points than Nixon for deregulating beer.

        1. Yeah, but having Billy around….wait, that’s a plus.

          Carter ahead of Nixon by two lengths now.

        2. Deregulated airlines

      4. I think it’s safe to say that no president comes away looking that great. How about Jackson= Trial of Tears. Grant= Indian Wars. Truman dropped the bomb. It seems the only ones who come out alright are Coolidge and Eisenhower who didn’t really do anything.

        1. …who didn’t really do anything.

          Exactly. But Ike did give us a huge public works program.

          1. I-5. Eisenhower is my fucking hero.

          2. And Viet Nam. I’ve got to give a big shout-out for Viet Nam.

  5. All political power, so called, rests practically upon this matter of money. Any number of scoundrels, having money enough to start with, can establish themselves as a “government”; because, with money, they can hire soldiers, and with soldiers extort more money; and also compel general obedience to their will. It is with government, as Caesar said it was in war, that money and soldiers mutually supported each other; that with money he could hire soldiers, and with soldiers extort money. So these villains, who call themselves governments, well understand that their power rests primarily upon money. With money they can hire soldiers, and with soldiers extort money. And, when their authority is denied, the first use they always make of money, is to hire soldiers to kill or subdue all who refuse them more money.

    For this reason, whoever desires liberty, should understand these vital facts, viz.: 1. That every man who puts money into the hands of a “government” (so called), puts into its hands a sword which will be used against him, to extort more money from him, and also to keep him in subjection to its arbitrary will. 2. That those who will take his money, without his con- [*17] sent, in the first place, will use it for his further robbery and enslavement, if he presumes to resist their demands in the future. 3. That it is a perfect absurdity to suppose that any body of men would ever take a man’s money without his consent, for any such object as they profess to take it for, viz., that of protecting him; for why should they wish to protect him, if he does not wish them to do so? To suppose that they would do so, is just as absurd as it would be to suppose that they would take his money without his consent, for the purpose of buying food or clothing for him, when he did not want it. 4. If a man wants “protection,” he is competent to make his own bargains for it; and nobody has any occasion to rob him, in order to “protect” him against his will. 5. That the only security men can have for their political liberty, consists in their keeping their money in their own pockets, until they have assurances, perfectly satisfactory to themselves, that it will be used as they wish it to be used, for their benefit, and not for their injury. 6. That no government, so called, can reasonably be trusted for a moment, or reasonably be supposed to have honest purposes in view, any longer than it depends wholly upon voluntary support.

    These facts are all so vital and so self-evident, that it cannot reasonably be supposed that any one will voluntarily pay money to a “government,” for the purpose of securing its protection, unless he first make an explicit and purely voluntary contract with it for that purpose.

    It is perfectly evident, therefore, that neither such voting, nor such payment of taxes, as actually takes place, proves anybody’s consent, or obligation, to support the Constitution. Consequently we have no evidence at all that the Constitution is binding upon anybody, or that anybody is under any contract or obligation whatever to support it. And nobody is under any obligation to support it.

    1. Cool story, Hansel.

      1. Go in there and chop its head off

  6. Katherine, I think you just hit a GOLDMINE!!!

    Okay, we put the Presidents “Do as I say, not as I do” on trading cards, and make a Trading Card Game(TCG) based on it. Then, we have a video game, where those moments are anthropomorphized into creatures- they’ll be cute or some shit.

    Then, all we’ll need is for Japan to make in into an anime and BOOM- goes the motherfucking dynamite.

    You’ve got pip, kid!

    1. If Japan gets a hold of it, will there be tentacle sex involved?

      1. ME HOPE SO, NEVER HAD SEX WITH SQUIDWARD FROM CUTE SPONGEBOB SHOW!

  7. Is there even a plausable argument as to why the Debt Limit should be raised at all? Anybody? Why do we need to make ourselves MORE in debt in order to …. get out of debt???????????????

    1. Spend less. A lot less. Keep spending a lot less.

      There, problem solved!

      1. Spend less. A lot less. Keep spending a lot less.

        There, problem solved!

        This is the only part they seem to hear.

        1. The evidence favors your interpretation. I concede.

    2. It sends the wrong signal to “investors”.

    3. For the childeren’s edumcation?

    4. But…but…confidence in the market! Or something…

    5. Something about multipliers and how governments can stimulate economies into prosperity. Just ask the Soviets about their great success in this regard.

      1. Oh, confidence in the market is fine… unless someone makes a profit.

  8. He doesn’t seem to handle criticism very well nor does he seem to be able to ‘reach across the aisle’.

    1. I’m thankful for that last part. The last thing I want is a bipartisan treasury raids.. oh wait.

  9. The debt limit should be raised so as to assure the markets that government is serious about tackling the debt problem. Otherwise, the markets will meltdown, babies will die, grandmothers will be pushed over cliffs, zombies will roam the earth and evil white Republicans from the comfort of their mansions will secretly operate bombing campaigns via drones over minority inhabited urban centers.

    1. My grandma is kinda frail. Can she get in on this action of going over a cliff? I’m helping her with her lving expenses and it would really help me out.

      1. fuckin old people, how do they work?

  10. So, someone explain to me what happens if the government defaults on the debt “owed” to the Fed.

    1. Or, if it defaults on Treasuries, the Fed can always buy them up and stick them in Maiden Lane IV

    2. So, someone explain to me what happens if the government defaults on the debt “owed” to the Fed.

      Some people who bought some really risky bonds that they thought were really safe finally get hosed.

    3. “Investors” fear making future “investments” in “America” therefore deprive “America” of future “credit” and/or “capital”. In response, these “investors” will take their “capital” overseas to much more stable places like “Greece” or “Portugal” and leave “America” “out in the cold”. So to speak.

      Did I miss any scare quotes?

      1. [EMPIRE] [ISRAEL] [MASONS]

    4. I’m speaking specifically about the Treasuries that the Federal Reserve owns. Who gets “burned”? The Fed can always print some more money to cover their losses. I suppose technically it’s bank reserves that are getting hosed, but bank reserves don’t mean shit anymore. Bank solvency is determined by Tier 1 and tier 2 capital asset ratios. It would end up being another round of quantitative easing. Right?

      1. I just eased out a quantity.

  11. Republicans from the comfort of their mansions will secretly operate bombing campaigns via drones over minority inhabited urban centers.

    Urban Renewal Agencies already cornered this market.

  12. Reason always shows Obama with an angry face.

    Could they be playing on states rights types’ instinctual fear of black rebellions.

    1. Or maybe Reason doesn’t always show him with an angry face? Of specific images I can recall, the one of him smoking and the one of him in front of the Superman statue are the images I recall seeing the most here.

      1. I like the one where he’s in the tunic, busting through that door. I think he’s got a halo, too.

        1. What about the one from his high school yearbook?

          1. There’s one where he’s about to eat something, too.

            1. I only know about the one where he’s feeding something to Americans.

      2. How about the one where he’s riding the unicorn naked?

        (Although I somehow doubt he could actually get near a unicorn.)

    2. The complex motivation for which there’s no evidence is definitely more likely than that the Reason staff just doesn’t like the guy.

      1. When you have to reach that hard, you might as well go all the way to full retard.

    3. Reason always shows Obama with an angry face.

      Could they be playing on states rights types’ instinctual fear of black rebellions.

      Could they really be enjoying be playing on states rights types the sad/angry face that we always see when a president isn’t getting his way!

      FIFY

    4. THAT’S an angry face? Looks like convinction to me. But that can’t be right.

      I’m still waiting on proof that Dick Cheney has ever smiled. I’m not taking the word of the Cheney family on that one.

      1. I’ve seen photos, but they could have been ‘shopped.

    5. Oh, looky here, guys! This “mustard” character stumbled onto the Top Secret “states’ rights = pining for being able to own niggers legally” Plan!

      We’re nicked, gang! Time to scram!

  13. Shorter Obama: Leave your ultimatums at the door, or else!

  14. “do as I say, not as I do”

    It’s not even that honest.

    It’s “I’m doing the exact fucking opposite thing that I say that I’m doing right now.”

    The shit-eating grin he wears as he says it is his tell.

  15. Fuck all the presidents. We should have stuck with the Articles of Confederation…

    1. If we had stuck with the Articles much longer we’d all be speaking British now.

  16. So, turns out Kaylee [Anthony] was actually in Al Capone’s [VAULT], and Geraldo will reveal this on his next [SHOW].

    And how did the proecution miss Colonel Mustard, in the library, with a lead pipe?

    What the hell were we talking about here?

  17. +1000
    Actually, with all of this “How relevant is the Constitution anyways?” talk floating around the MSM – which without question is a trial balloon of sorts – I wouldn’t be surprised if the Constitution’s days are numbered.
    Not that politicians haven’t been pissing on it since the start – just that they will actually start to come out of the closet and admit to not caring for it one way or another.

    1. The Constitution is irrelevant. We don’t need it anymore.

      1. I miss having the real Tony around. He was kind of like the H&R resident punching bag.

        1. The real Tony DOES hate the Constitution. So how do we know the 7:43 Tony isn’t the real deal?

          1. Not worshiping something as an eternally unchanging sacred text–that happens to confirm every bit of my fringe political dogma, curiously–is not the same thing as hating it.

    2. Not that politicians haven’t been pissing on it since the start – just that they will actually start to come out of the closet and admit to not caring for it one way or another. *

      *CitationRevolution Needed

  18. There’s a time for politics and there’s a time for action. Now is a time for action.

    Obama needs to step up and be Commander-in-Chief of the economy like he was elected to be. We spent two years coddling the right even though we had the votes to do what was necessary to get the country back on track. Look where that got us. No more Mr. Nice President. Obama needs to let the right know that they can do it the easy way or they can do it the hard way but they are going to do it.

    1. Do what? The actual work of this nation while all of you leftist beatniks take another grad degree in flower arrangement?

      1. We’re, what, ten trillion in the hole, mustard? And you want Obama to spend some more?

        The stupid is strong in you.

    2. Don’t worry, my young stupid. We will have a command economy soon enough.

    3. LOL at this bit of goon-fiction. Obama will do it “the hard way” how, exactly? He hasn’t even proposed a goddamn budget, and somehow he’s going to take this complete lack of a plan and leverage it into some awesome executioner’s axe hanging over Team Red’s head?

      All that propaganda you’re picking up from your college professors has clearly retarded whatever bit of critical thinking skills you may have possessed.

  19. I never thought I would call the President of the United States an unqualified, incompetent and arrogant buffoon –and actually mean it.

  20. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S…..#Civil_War

    Legally, the last 40,000 or so slaves were freed in Kentucky by the final ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution in December 1865. Slaves still held in Tennessee, Kentucky, Kansas, New Jersey, Delaware, West Virginia, Maryland, Missouri, Washington, D.C., and twelve parishes of Louisiana also became legally free on this date.

  21. “It’s my hope that everybody is gonna leave their ultimatums at the door, that we’ll all leave our political rhetoric at the door.”

    In other words: “Stop arguing for what you believe is good policy and fall into line!”

    If there is a sentiment that is more contemptuous of a republican form of government, i do not know what it could be. The MSM will not call Obama on this because he is their guy and he is using this rhetoric to serve the agenda they generally agree with.

  22. “It’s my hope that everybody is gonna leave their ultimatums at the door, that we’ll all leave our political rhetoric at the door.”
    Translation from Obama-speak:
    ‘So long as you’ll agree with me, we’ll call it a compromise’.

  23. Translation from Obama-speak:

  24. http://www.nps.gov/abli/fortea…..lavery.pdf

    Read these. INcluding things from when Lincoln was 28, was in the illinois legislature, and then come back with this revisionist “Purely political” emancipation. Yeah. No dice.

  25. When it comes to comparing presidents, I think it’s necessary to look at different aspects of what it might take to be a “good” president.

    To all reports Bush has administrative ability and experience. He just executed a bunch of really boneheaded policies. And certainly no one is going to accuse him of being a deep thinker. But even Molly Ivins described him as “affable and intelligent”.

    There have been few presidents with the ability to perceive the realities of foreign policy as Nixon. On domestic policy he suck, signing every welfare bill left over from LBJ that the Democratic congress sent him. But his downfall was due to the fact that he was paranoid nearly to the point of insanity, forever imagining schemes of a host of enemies who were out to get him personally and to destroy the nation as well.

    Obama came to the office with possibly the slenderest portfolio of executive experience of any president ever. To compound that deficit, it also appears that he has little administrative talent, but rather just a cagey word healers talent for politicking (something he has in common with Bill Clinton). To all of that he adds a nostalic long to finally enact all the programs that “we” failed to get going back in those hacyon days when American Exceptionalist Liberalism was dominant. To try to accomplish this he has surrounded himself with a bunch of New Deal nostalgia buffs and old sixties new leftists who’s ideas are stale and who while not knowing how anything actually works want to plan every aspect of your life while you do try to do what you know how to do.

  26. *GAG*

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.