Obama’s Not The President
It’s apparent to me that when Obama becomes President (he’s not the yet, ya know!), he will not be able to move fast enough for many of the Radical Right, Libertarian or Fence-Sitting bloggers and commentors around here. Their blog posts and comments here are filled with, “We know what Obama will do . . . “, “He hasn’t shown us anything yet . . . “, “What’s he gonna do?”, etc.
Seriously, you guys and gals just need to relax. It’s only January 4th and you’ve been going at it since November 5th of last year. He has his cabinet and White House staff picked, confirmation hearings are already scheduled and, I imagine, he’s working harder than anyone of us right now trying to figure out how to clean up the mess the Repbulicans have left.
As Bill Maher said on the Rachel Maddow Show back in November:
During the course of the campaign, a lot of the times, we, smart asses in the press, would question or somehow second guess something Obama was doing and it turned out almost that every turn that he was smarter than we were. So, I’m just going to sit back for awhile, until he messes up. I’m not going to stick my neck on the line because this is one smart cookie. We’re so used to having a president who’s so much dumber than us. It’s like shooting fish in a barrel. Well, now, maybe we met our match.
Oh yeah, one last thing, George W. Bush is still the President. So just chill.
Tags: President Obama
Nicely said, Nemski. Although I can understand the concern on some level. The Decider checked out months ago, and the American people are desperate for leadership. The GOP is incapable of governing. Their much better at sniping. Trouble is… this country is facing serious problems. Sniping without solutions – a GOP forte – won’t cut it. Republican ideology is financially and morally bankrupt. Criticizing Obama won’t change that… or save them.
And the other thing, most don’t want Obama to succeed, because when he does, it will prove the ideology barren.
he will not be able to move fast enough for many of the Radical Right, Libertarian or Fence-Sitting bloggers and commentors around here
Indeed, but I’d also observe that Obama moving fast (or doing much of anything that doesn’t fit their agendas) isn’t their concern at this point — having something to critique in order to demonstrate the superiority of the ideology of the writer is. When we face so very many challenges (challenges that Obama will have to deal with) and the concern is with whether Obama is speaking and NOT with what the current administration is doing to deal with the issue, you know you are dealing with a fair bit of wanking.
Obama is not going to make all of us happy and will provide plenty of opportunity for critique, but a critique that he isn’t acting like the President when he hasn’t been sworn in yet probably tells you what you need to know about how serious these folks intend to be over the next 4 years.
They’re just setting the stage to run against him in 2010 and 2012. Republicans don’t really have an ideology to fall back on right now, so they’re going to run on the “block Obama” platform.
I think a running joke on Eschaton has been we’re in the -x day of the failed Obama presidency. Looking at your countdown it’s -16 days.
No Obama will never be able to move fast enough to satisfy the bozos, mainly because the bozos will be throwing up roadblocks.
You gotta be kidding me. Obama spoke out on the economic bush failure, on the Mumbai terrorists attacks….but not on Gaza.
His talking heads report on american corporate media..there is only one president at a time. And, this problem with Israhell will be dealt with by the Secretary of State, Hilary Clinton. Is that the change we thought we were getting. Where is the diplomacy? Where are the back channels into Israhell to stop these bombings? Where is his UN ambassdor and the back channels?
Why does the United States have the ability to overrule with one vote the vote of 14 others. The UN is obviously corrupt if the US has more power than the entire UN.
No foreign reporters permitted into Gaza, even though the Israhell Supreme Court told them they had to let the press in. They do not listen to their courts, the International Court…cuz…well, we are Israhell.
liz, you asked a lot of questions, questions I think should be asked of President Bush. Just saying.
Nemski,
Not sure where you’ve been the last few years, but Liz has been relentless in asking questions and utterly damning the failures of the Bush Administration.
MM, let me go back to the point of the post, Obama is not the freaking President of the United freaking States. Criticizing Obama prior to him taking office for things you think he won’t do is ridiculous.
Look Obama can’t win on this argument if he acts he meddling and so he waits and is accused of not acting. In the meantime Bush has ran away 2 months ago showing just how much he cares for the welfare of the country. We all know by his actions on 9-11 that when faced with real problems he can’t be found. I could add Katerina to the list along with other examples
If this was Nov 1st, he’d have to take a position right? or do you think the media would let him golf another 9 holes with no response?
To suggest his silence on the Middle East is ok is laughable.
JF, what’s laughable is the Radical Right’s — I mean President Bush’s lack of response. If you go to the Peace In the Middle East section of The White House, there is only the one radio address from yesterday. That’s it. Nothing more. This is the guy who is in charge right now. And there is only one statement on the US Department of State website. Puhleaze.
I think we can say that both the WH and Obama’s response or lack of one is pathetic.
That still doesn’t mean the world doesn’t anticipate Obama’s view more and he should say something.
“It’s only January 4th…”
can’t wait for what we get after he actually takes office –
http://www.delawaretalkradio.com/delawarepolitics/breaking-richardson-out/
O.D.S. or Obama Derangement Syndrome is pronounced “Odious” and is a neurological disorder spreading rapidly among wingnuts. In addition to it being an affliction that they have, it is also something they are.
MM, let me go back to the point of the post, Obama is not the freaking President of the United freaking States. Criticizing Obama prior to him taking office for things you think he won’t do is ridiculous.
This from the blog that has–in the words of both jason and DD–already declared Obama the President–a week or so ago DD said that he was going to stop calling Obama the President-elect because he was the real (or at least “acting” to use jason’s words) President in the minds of what 82% of the American people?
Give me a break–you folks have been trumpeting all his leadership on the economy and his cabinet selections and his weekly broadcasts about what he’s going to do. He’s already lobbying Congress to pass specific legislation, has his transition team speaking out on the reorganization of NASA to counter the Chinese in space, and now he can’t speak out on the Middle East?
This isn’t about ideology (at least not for me)–it’s about a politician trying to have it both ways at the same time. His people are now spinning (see the Telegraph) that the American people voted him in to fix the economy, and he’s not going to get distracted from that by open war in the Middle East. One of his advisors suggested that he’s being quiet about the Mid-East because anything he said critical about Israel in Gaza might cause him to have trouble getting his economic stimulus package passed.
Give me a break. The “Obama is smarter than we are” mantra might have some legs with domestic economic policy–it doesn’t have anything to do with his sudden inability to either support Israel or condemn Israeli tactics.
This is all happening at the same time we have John Bolton out running up test balloons on Fox that we (or the Israelis) should hit Iran’s nuclear facilities prior to Obama’s inauguration.
I can understand his problem: his campaign statements to AIPAC and then the Muslim media were completely contradictory.
Whether Obama handles this issue well or not won’t create a failed Presidency, but it will conceivably hamper his ability to conduct foreign policy.
And finally–for nemski, cassandra, and everyone else here who would like to pawn off the criticism of his non-stance to wingnuts, fence-sitters, or libertarians, please note that an awful lot of progressive and liberal commentators (at least outside this State) are begnining to weigh in as well.
“O.D.S. or Obama Derangement Syndrome is pronounced “Odious” and is a neurological disorder spreading rapidly among wingnuts.”
I guess you plan on ignoring anything that is negative for the next four years regarding Democrats, to include inaction, scandals, wrong decisions…etc. which will inevitably pop up.
Look in the mirror if you want to see who is deranged?
There is nothing Obama can do or say that would be a smart thing to do or say. That’s just the reality of the situation.
I guess you plan on ignoring anything that is negative for the next four years regarding Democrats, to include inaction, scandals, wrong decisions…etc. which will inevitably pop up.
Actually exactly the opposite. I believe it is patriotic to question government authority no matter who is in charge. But Obama ain’t in charge, yet.
“Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.”
Mark Twain
It is an important distinction.
Don’t put words in my mouth Steve. I said that the world community was looking to Obama prior to the election.
That has nothing to do with the fact that wingnut goofballs like Feroce think Obama should stage some kind of coup
eand replace Bush early.Isn’t a coupe a car? 😉
Give me a break. As far as a Libertarian talking about foreign affiars, it’s laughable. Doesn’t your party platform read,
Seems to be that Obama is doing what you guys would like. Nothing.
coup.
Merci.
nemski
If you’re going to argue foreign policy with me, argue about what I’ve written, not what you dig up from a party platform I disowned a long time ago.
How about you try to answer the arguments, not toss out ad hominems?
And jason–that’s fine–you don’t have the cajones to stand by what you’ve written, that’s fine.
The interesting thing for Obama is that the economic meltdown (which his handlers are now trumpeting as what he ran to fix) and foreign affairs (about which even his transition team admits his grasp is pretty much limited to Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan) are going to be the defining issues of his presidency.
If you want me to believe that he is being principled about not talking now (despite what insiders are saying), then I suppose you’ll join me on 20 or 21 January for his major pronouncement on US foreign policy?
After all, he’s hitting the ground ready to go on day one…..
20 June 2008, in a post on Obama and the FISA sell-out [and not on Obama and world opinion as he suggests in #19], jason titled his post
Obama is already the acting president
And here’s the key lines:
Did you notice how everyone was waiting to hear from Obama on FISA in order to get a clear sense of where we are going with this as a nation? Unlike George Bush, Obama released a Presidential statement that lays the ground work for moving forward.
On 24 December, in a post entitled “President Obama’s Christmas Message,” Delawaredem writes,
I am no longer calling him President-elect. In the heart and minds of 82% of the American people, he is already our President.
How quickly we forget.
If you are going to coronate him ahead of the inauguration, then you lose the ability to play the wounded virgin when he gets criticized for only being the acting president when it is either convenient or expedient.
And as for the “I didn’t write that, we’re different authors here” defense, anybody is free to check the comments and find out if any of the other DL contributors disagreed with the characterization.
The only one I can find who actually stuck to his guns on this (as much as it pains me to say it) is donsquishy.
Staying out of the Middle East before the inauguration was an eminently Presidential action. Foreign relations follows different rules than domestic policy debates.
Besides, none of us has any idea what Obama is actually doing behind the scenes with respect to the Middle East or anything else.
cajones
Whatever fraud. You don’t have the cajones to admit that you are a Republican.
That’s the best you’ve ever got, isn’t it, little fellow?
At least dv takes the time to personalize his insults.
First you complain I put words in your mouth, and then I quote you directly, and your only comeback is…
You are the liberal equivalent of Eric Dondero.”
And when you figure out who he is and what he does, you’ll know I spent a long time considering this one.
Here is the Telegraph article that Steve is referring to.
What is interesting about this article is that is says:
1. Obama does not plan to speak on the Israel/Hamas crisis until after the 20th.
2. That HRC is set to launch some rounds of shuttle diplomacy right after the 20th
3. The Obama spokesperson notes that his priority is still the economy, but he will be working on multiple issues after the 20th
4. Obama is going to have to tackle the Middle East in some way, but there is an acknowledgment that 3 weeks in the Middle East is a very long time, and that the state of the board may be quite different than it is now.
Items 1 and 2 certainly do not constitute a non-stance. It is a stance that waits its turn. And John Bolton sees pretty much every opportunity to bomb Iran. And he won’t stop that. But there is nothing in the article to suggest that Obama won’t specifically deal with this issue — he will deal with it when it is his turn to do that.
If you are going to coronate him ahead of the inauguration, then you lose the ability to play the wounded virgin when he gets criticized for only being the acting president when it is either convenient or expedient.
Last time I looked, not one at this blog gets to summarily rewrite the Constitution, either. But go ahead and keep insisting that you don’t know hyperbole when you see it.
Facts don’t matter to these dumb asses Cassandra.
Republican Steve and goofball Feroce think Obama should stage a coup because I wrote a post ON 20 June 2008 saying Obama was presidential.
Either that or they think Obama should stage a coup because it the GOP talking point of the day.
Now that you know that these guys really are that credulous, you’ll start telling them that they need to send you a few grand every month and we can do some Serious Drinking Liberally.
Yes. Delaware Liberal rules the world. Pay your tithe in cash please. LOL!
Good jason.
It was hyperbole when it was convenient.
All I’m asking for is for Obama to make a statement, not storm the bastille.
You can make all the wonderful charges you’d like (I’m still waiting with baited breath for you to make the “republican’ charge stick, little fellow), but it doesn’t change the fact that you gave him all that build-up…
By the way, cassandra, following the dv concept that nobody ever clicks through the links, that was a really nice job of doing a pro-Obama summary of an article that–if you’d quoted it like I did in my own post–is far more neutral.
Good spin.
Have you filled out your application to join the team yet?
Gee, I guess I have to apologize.
Just discovered that President-elect Obama has made his feelings vis a vis Gaza quite clear.
I’ll stop (seriously) suggesting we don’t know where he stands now.
http://delawarelibertarian.blogspot.com/2009/01/my-mistake-obama-apparently-has-spoken.html
That article is indeed more neutral that you’re characterization of it thus:
His people are now spinning (see the Telegraph) that the American people voted him in to fix the economy, and he’s not going to get distracted from that by open war in the Middle East. One of his advisors suggested that he’s being quiet about the Mid-East because anything he said critical about Israel in Gaza might cause him to have trouble getting his economic stimulus package passed.
My summary of it points out how that article is abit broader in its intent than any of your two assertions of it above. And the business with not getting the stimulus package passed if he says anything critical is not in that article At All.
So basically, we have you, Steve, doing the spinning of a pretty nice article into something that fits the narrative you want to argue on which is that Obama is not paying attention to Gaza.
So while you are here passing useless judgments on who or who is not being somehow consistent in their worldview, I just thought I’d remind people of your own habits of parsing out exactly what you need to create your strawman of the day.
cassandra
You carefully omitted the fact that I followed up that assessment by actually quoting over one-third of the article.
Care to repeat the sections I quoted here and let other people judge if I mischaracterized.
cassandra
You are correct about the last sentence–my mistake. That link is from here:
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/No_word_from_Obama_as_Gaza_0103.html
See? I can admit it.
I am responding to your post here which quotes nothing of the article.
And, frankly, I didn’t go to your blog to get the article, but right to the Telegraph.
OK but I’m talking about this post here
http://delawarelibertarian.blogspot.com/2009/01/yeah-barack-obama-is-staying-out-of.html
Granting the miscommunication we’ve got going (that is probably my fault) you can see if go to my post that I did do what I said I did, vis a vis quoting the article.
Did you even read the links the Raw Story provided about the so-called threat to Obama’s economic plan? That claim comes NOT from an Obama advisor (as was your claim), but from Alexander Cockburn.
Alexander Cockburn, for cryin’ out loud. Who isn’t even much of an Obama supporter much less an advisor.
See what I mean about strawmen?
Wow, step away to watch the Iggles play and look what happens.
For the Anti-Obamas out there: Has it ever crossed your minds that maybe, just maybe, Bush and Rice have asked Obama and Clinton to remain silent?
Though I think anon #25 is spot on.
Well, I keep hoping that when the President of the Senate opens the votes of the Electoral College tomorrow or Tuesday, he’ll discover that the Electors were smart enough to say, “We ain’t voting for that inesperienced twit!” and gave a majority of their votes to John McCain.
Yeah, I realize that the odds of that are rather small . . . 🙁
“Either that or they think Obama should stage a coup because it the GOP talking point of the day.”
Jason, you’re blind ignorance regarding all things Obama is far from reality on the ground.
Obama is losing a battle he doesn’t know he’s in: The president-elect’s silence on the Gaza crisis is undermining his reputation in the Middle East
“The Al-Jazeera satellite television station recently broadcast footage of Obama on holiday in Hawaii, wearing shorts and playing golf, juxtaposed with scenes of bloodshed and mayhem in Gaza. Its report criticising “the deafening silence from the Obama team” suggested Obama is losing a battle of perceptions among Muslims that he may not realise has even begun.
“People recall his campaign slogan of change and hoped that it would apply to the Palestinian situation,” Jordanian analyst Labib Kamhawi told Liz Sly of the Chicago Tribune. “So they look at his silence as a negative sign. They think he is condoning what happened in Gaza because he’s not expressing any opinion.”
Regional critics claim Obama is happy to break his pre-inauguration “no comment” rule on international issues when it suits him. They note his swift condemnation of November’s terrorist attacks in Mumbai. Obama has also made frequent policy statements on mitigating the impact of the global credit crunch.
Obama’s absence from the fray is also allowing hostile voices to exploit the vacuum. “It would appear that the president-elect has no intention of getting involved in the Gaza crisis,” Iran’s Resalat newspaper commented sourly. “His stances and viewpoints suggest he will follow the path taken by previous American presidents… Obama, too, will pursue policies that support the Zionist aggressions.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jan/04/obama-gaza-israel
He did the same thing in Chicago. 262 murders since June and “No Comment” …are you kidding me?
What should Obama say? And what impact could his words have? Would they help or hurt? Now I’m assuming BushCo is doing something about the situation so… if Obama speaks out and his words trigger a reaction will he then own a situation he can’t control until the 20th?
Seriously, what would you have him say that wouldn’t be construed as fanning the flames?
Would I like Obama to speak out? Yes… only I’m at a loss as to what he should say. Perhaps one of you could supply the words.
John Feroce,
Like it or not, one thing that we have learned about Obama is that he will not be goaded into saying something either by his supporters or his detractors.
Another thing that we know is that wingnuts will criticize him no matter what he does.
He did the same thing in Chicago. 262 murders since June and “No Comment” …are you kidding me?
Not digging this argument, John. Forcing my middle-road hat here. What has Castle, Carper, or Biden mentioned about Wilmington’s record homicide year? What have Specter (sp?) or Casey said about Philly’s shocking homicide rate among the citizens AND police?
“Not digging this argument, John. Forcing my middle-road hat here. What has Castle, Carper, or Biden mentioned about Wilmington’s record homicide year? What have Specter (sp?) or Casey said about Philly’s shocking homicide rate among the citizens AND police?”
1. 262…262…262…since June
2. I almost added that I would have bet Joe Biden would have said something if it happened here
3. You can discount numbers 1 and 2, but you can’t ignore this one overwhelming fact…Obama’s voice. When he speaks his he gets a huge following and his supporters listen. He could have held a forum on violence and made an impact (I posted that earlier this summer)
goofball.
“What should Obama say?”
Not what “should” he say, what “is” he going to say! That’s what everyone wants to know.
“And what impact could his words have?”
I hope that is a rhetorical question.
“Would they help or hurt?”
It will help one party and hurt the other no doubt. Which party is what the world is waiting to hear.
“Would I like Obama to speak out? Yes… only I’m at a loss as to what he should say. Perhaps one of you could supply the words.”
It’s not our job, he was the one elected President of the United States. It is his duty to speak on world issues.
2. It did happen here — a record-setting number of murders in the city of Wilmington and none of our Congressional delegation have been up on this (much less Wilmington’s Mayor). The numbers are different, but the record stands.
So after a year of these wingnuts pooh-poohing the Obama Messiah thing that they accused his supporters of suffering from — am I the only one really amused that it is mainly “the Radical Right, Libertarian or Fence-Sitting bloggers and commentors around here” who who keep expecting Messiah-like behavior from Obama?
Jason
You have lowered yourself to name calling it’s quite sad.
OMG…I can’t do this. I just can’t get into the partisan intolerance game. Obama’s voice, or lack thereof, makes him culpable for the burgeoning homicides in Chicago? That’s pure opportunistic blame throwing. I’m not defending Obama (maybe, indirectly, I am), but stepping on a partisan, intolerant stomp fest. Just like I do when all Republicans are to blame for the actions of a few idiots. The homicides are absolutely horrible, but where in the hell is the local chain of representation first?
Maybe punditry is my area. I can’t carry this water.
“Obama’s voice, or lack thereof, makes him culpable for the burgeoning homicides in Chicago?”
Absolutely Not. That doesn’t mean you don’t use the most dominant voice (who happens to f’n live there, let alone represent it) to speak out and call for calm. It happens all the time from prominent business leaders to politicians and athletes, etc.
We had a forum on violence at my university and that all stemmed from only one fight.
Were either of the state’s US Senators speaking, though?
It’s Jan. 23, and he’s STILL not the president. He is a usurper, and his pretensions are all illegitimate.
Wow…
yes…They are still out there.
Jim, I’ll be sending the black helicopters over to visit you soon.
We know where you are.
We are coming for you.
🙂
Next you will be telling us he’s not black either. Can’t you at least leave us SOME illusions to cling to?
Do we really know this Obama guy? REALLY?
Jim // Jan 23, 2009 at 3:40 pm
It’s Jan. 23, and he’s STILL not the president. He is a usurper, and his pretensions are all illegitimate.
Is this the Reverend Jim Ignatowski? Say “hi” to Louie for me! Watch out for those brownies, they can ruin your Ivy League career!!! Okie doke!