Via a bud on FB, I think this article by Ulsterman just nails it with an interview with an Obama insider now on the outside.
But after Obama was sworn in, things began to change? Almost immediately. Obama loved to campaign. He clearly didn’t like the work of being President though, and that attitude was felt by the entire White House staff within weeks after the inauguration. Obama the tireless, hard working candidate became a very tepid personality to us. And the few news stories that did come out against him were the only things he seemed to care about. He absolutely obsesses over Fox News. For being so successful, Barack Obama is incredibly thin-skinned. He takes everything very personally.
...
So if Obama doesn’t appear interested in the job of president, what does he do day after day? Well, he takes his meetings just like any other president would, though even then, he seems to lack a certain focus and on a few occasions, actually leaves with the directive that be given a summary of the meeting at a later date. I hear he plays a lot of golf, and watches a lot of television – ESPN mainly. I’ll tell you this – if you want to see President Obama get excited about a conversation, turn it to sports. That gets him interested. You start talking about Congress, or some policy, and he just kinda turns off. It’s really very strange. I mean, we were all led to believe that this guy was some kind of intellectual giant, right? Ivy League and all that. Well, that is not what I saw. Barack Obama doesn’t have a whole lot of intellectual curiosity. When he is off script, he is what I call a real “slow talker”. Lots of ummms, and lots of time in between answers where you can almost see the little wheel in his head turning very slowly. I am not going to say the president is a dumb man, because he is not, but yeah, there was a definite letdown when you actually hear him talking without the script.
...
Can he win in 2012? Oh – absolutely. Who else campaigns as well as Barack Obama? Nobody. What politician is more loved and supported by the media? Nobody. I don’t see the Republicans offering up a candidate as powerful as Obama. I mean Sarah Palin? Really? Obama would defeat her by a 20 point landslide! Romney? The Republicans will enjoy these midterm elections, but 2012 is Obama’s year if he chooses to run again. As a president, Obama has many flaws, but as a candidate, he is near flawless.
But would another four years of an Obama presidency be the best thing for America? (Long pause) Now that is a much more interesting question right there, and a question I think more and more Democrat Party insiders are asking themselves these days, myself included. I am going to come right out and say it – No. Obama is not up to the job of being president. He simply doesn’t seem to care about the work involved. You want to know what? Obama is lazy. He really is. And it is getting worse and worse. Would another four years of Obama be the best thing for America? No it would not. What this country needs is a president who is focused on the job more than on themselves. Obama is not that individual. I actually hope he doesn’t run again. Looking back, as much fun as the campaign in 2008 was, Hillary Clinton should have been the nominee. Hillary was ready to be president. Obama was not ready. He had never lost a campaign. Everything was handed to him. He doesn’t really understand the idea of work – real, hard, get your heart and soul into it work. And frankly, that is very disappointing to a whole lot of us…
60 comments:
I got a one word description for POTUS and the next two years: implosion. Expect him to go seriously off the hook within the next 12 months.
Yeah, I'm gonna call BS on the claim that this is coming from a "former Obama insider". What high-level Dem refers to their party as the "Democrat Party"? That's a GOP thing.
It kind of reads like a Clinton "hostage" that was brought in early and has now left. Notsomuch an Obama operative, but a Democrat who is a Clintonista. If you read it through that prism it helps methinks.
For starters, it got one big fact wrong...Obama lost his first bid for national office, when he ran for the House in 2000 and was beaten in the Dem primaries 2-1.
As for the rest of it, people on the right (justifiably) criticized unsourced "anonymous insider" hit pieces on Palin. This is no different.
I'm not so sure about this article or the source-but it does highlight a big problem for the administration-the other side is doing all the talking. Even when the facts are on his side-he has yet to step to the plate and slam these people down. Thus Newt Gingrich is allowed to go nuts about neo-colonialism and Kenya, and to anoint DSouza like he actually has a clue. ( Only in America can a man born to privilege in India, who did not become a citizen till he was 29, get away with criticisms that are demonstrably flawed.).
I, like a lot of others, have been mystified why he just takes it-instead of fighting back and putting his critics back in their place.
Seems to make a lot of sense and mesh with what we see from the outside.
Never thought I would see the day when Hillary would seem to be appealing...
Our country deserves better than either of those options, but the biased media will heed the desires of the left and destroy any conservative alternative, while praising "moderate" losers like McCain.
Skippy,
In your last paragraph you describe the same thing I am seeing - though you are looking at it from a different side of the prism.
As for USAF Mike; dude, watch the knee. Take a deep breath and re-read the article. I don't see this as a hit piece unless this is Blue on Blue. Take another look at it.
I'll take Obama over Palin any day.
I'd take Nixon over Obama or Billary.
Now you know how us Republicans felt about George Bush in his second term. He had a bully pulpit to call the Democrats for the socialist liberals who kept saying, " we voted for the war but we really didn't mean it!"
Sucks when the shoe is on the other foot...
FYI Nixon's dead.
Nixon's dead, and I'd still take him over Obama.
Hell, I'd take the 11-year old defenseman from the hockey team I coach over The One
He is a classic narcissist. They are extremely lazy unless it's about something they want to do that garners them adulation and respect and huzzahs from others. They don't actually accomplish anything on their own if you look closely at their record. They surf in on other people's hard work and take credit. But they can't be more uninterested in the minutiae of daily life and responsibility. It's all about appearances. And yes, they're very thin-skinned. And if you scratch the surface there's nothing below. The one thing they're good at is causing chaos in the lives and jobs of people around them. Just because they can. The responsibility for this is at the feet of the American people and the press that didn't examine who he really was and whether he had ever actually done anything but spend other people's money his whole career.
Narcissists love the chase. Once they catch the car, they don't really want it. Never did. It was all about the hunt.
Hit piece or not. Republican or Democrat, is it wrong in its observations? The man has not worked a day in his life. He is soft and loves to compaign because then it is all about him. He was and is an empty suit. He purposefully took no stand and let people project their concerns and hopes upon him and he just smiled and waved boys, smiled and waved. Pathetic, really that white guilt brought us to this. I mean, you want a Black President? Fine elect someone of substance. Even Powell has come out against him a bit. There were MUCH more substantive people that would not have destroyed this country.
Oh yeah, and his intellectual capabilities? I've yet to see it. No grades, no bonifides, and clearly doesn't do math well and I'd argue his English skills are as lively as a corps, er corpse. :)
Nixon, dead, still will do less damage to the country than the empty suit we currently have.
You're right - President Bush was hit from all sides, and felt responding would've diminished the office of the President, but his minions didn't fight back because they saw all the media momentum swing against them and they weren't going to defend a sinking ship. What a crock - those chicken littles should've defended the President because his decisions were right.
Now Obama is getting the same treatment, and it even feels to some extent that the major media, seeing a sinking ship on their side, doesn't want to go down with it.
Looks like everyone wants to be popular, and when it isn't popular to defend your guy, you can see how shallow people are. Nice going MSM! The problem is - once there is a Democrat with some momentum, the MSM will go back to being the shallow hit piece artists they are.
This clearly is an insider talking. If this was a Republican hit piece, you couldn't hid the partisanship, because Obama is so profoundly loathed.
You can see the insider not apologizing for anything that has been done, policy, money spent, etc. You simply see an insider who is disappointed in President Obama's work ethic. You can see an insider who wants more done, as if no enough crap hasn't been done already. Obama doesn't know work, and even recently someone wrote that he see's the Presidency as below him. I buy that. But it scares me too.
President Bush saw the Presidency as being more than any one man, and Obama see's himself as more than the Presidency. That's an obersvation I buy.
I have seen no leadership from him on anything.
I am glad he dsilikes his job, hell I am glad he dislikes being an American. The feeling is quite mutual...
Jeez, Guest, I'm glad you told us that, or we'd have never known that!
Nixon couldn't get elected today. He was too liberal for today's modern Republicans.
Right.
Wow. That's a great find, CDR. I've been wondering, as Obama's polls sink and he seems to be utterly floundering in the job, if Democrats will quietly pressure him not to run for a second term.
Based on the evidence to date, I'd have to conclude that he's been affirmative-actioned upward all his life. And that, as you say, a profound sense of white guilt led a lot of people to vote for a completely unqualified black man.
Definitely a Democrat writing this. No one else would be delusional enough to assert that an Obama with an actual and disastrous track record will be able to campaign in 2012 as well as he did in 2008.
Election Campaigns are popularity contests, governing, however, is not.
That's a person that has faith in America's stupidity and small attention span. How else could you think he would get elected in 2012? That is a ways away and we have to see how November, the coming change in direction from the Legislative branch and how that further impacts the Presidential election.
You're on a profound roll today, LT B.
At least Nixon WANTED to do this job
I was sent this article last evening in an email and found it fascinating. Enough so to forward.
Bran muffins. Bran muffins. It keeps me fluid and the crap continues to flow. :)
1. Harvard Law washes people out. You might get in 'cause you fit a category, but once in, you have to fight to stay. There is one test per class. Grades are given on a blind bases and the professors are proud gate-keepers of what they think is the best school in the world. A Harvard law degree is an earned accomplishment.
2. It is a fact that blacks have been kept down. I have seen cross burnings and the klukers are still with us. It is unfortunate, but racism still exists.
3. I would strongly suggest you read Gladwell's Outliers before you attack affirmative action.
BB-
I don't know what harvard Law is like, but a friend went to Stanford. She was actually very concerned about how she was doing and spoke to her academic counselor about it. They laughed at her. Flunking out reflects poorly on the admissions committee's decision, so no one is "washed out."
Your point about one exam and blind grading is correct, but Law Review usually has two routes onto it - one might be grades, but the other way was to "write on" and I don't recall that being a blind process.
You are also correct about some racists still among us - but there frankly aren't that many. I remember when the Nazi's (yes, they still exist too) demonstrated back in the day when I was in college - which is almost 30 years ago now. The dozen of them were siourounded by 50 cops to protect them from the 200 counter protestors - and no, this wasn't on a college campus. Sadly, the wrong people looked like a lawless mob in that picture.
I don't think this is legit. In addition to the Democrat Party thing noted below, the source also claims Barack Obama has never lost an election. Not true, and an "insider" would know that.
Frankly, I think the reason most of you find this so "fascinating" is that it reinforces what you already believe to be true.
I don't like a lot of what the President is doing, but the idea that its a problem because he isn't working hard enough is just laughable. Remember how Ronald Magnus used to take a nap every day, how he was lazy, etc., etc.? It isn't how hard someone is working (and I don't want a hyperactive government, thanks), but what they are doing and how they are as a leader. Now _that's_ stuff I can get upset about with this Administration.
<p>"At Harvard, she felt the same racial divide. Verna Williams and Michelle became friends in their first year of law school. She remembers many of their fellow black students worrying that white classmates viewed them as charity cases. But she suggests Michelle was not among them. "She recognized that she had been privileged by affirmative action and she was very comfortable with that," Williams recalls." Newsweek Feb 16, 2008. Later it states that in Michelle's view, she got in as a "legacy" as her brother was a student athlete.
</p><p>
</p><p>"Diversity Policies" or affirmative action these days can minimize a member's qualifications if they are the targeted class. The fact that we are having this conversation amplifies that fact. </p>
I think it reads like it was written by a republican who talked to a Clintonista, which would explain the "Democrat Party" thing.
You're right, that is an R phrase. W used to say that and it drove the Democrats in the Democratic Party crazy.
It's also worth noting that this is not the only data point to assert the President has an attention deficit. Two data points can represent a coincidence or a trend.
Let's hope it's the former and not the latter.
Hey Bubba, if Harvard Law is so damn hard and so prestigous, how come Obama can't seem to find the time to release his school records to show us how good he did?
Inquiring minds and all that, Bubba.
That is a scary thought. What with the rumors of Mr. Biden retiring, and Mrs. Clinton becoming VP. Hillary might yet become the first female POTUS. A smart, dedicated Alinskyite as President. EEK!
Sal, let me know when UPS drops off the blast doors for my burrow under your porch.
Getting into the White House is like getting a big "hit me, opposition" sign. Some inhabitants lash out, some ignore the noise, smartest ones take a smile.
Obama was great demagogue and visioner, but that doesnt necessarily translate well into running a state.
It ought to be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things. Because the innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under the old conditions, and lukewarm defenders in those who may do well under the new. This coolness arises partly from fear of the opponents, who have the laws on their side, and partly from the incredulity of men, who do not readily believe in new things until they have had a long experience of them.
That Macchiavelli guy was simply brilliant...
"<span>That Macchiavelli guy was simply brilliant..."</span>
Yeah, but Joe Biden would have still talked down to him.
But the thing you guys seem to forget was that the war(s) were not going well for the majority of Bush's second term. No matter what message he wanted to put out-it still did not offset that fact that: Bush started a war that was not in the US long term interest, was getting people killed for no return, and the Iraqis ended up just as messed up as they were to start with.
Don't underestimate the influence of the war on the election of 2006 and 2008.
And then there was the creature McCain created. His real legacy to America, the Alaskan Frankenstein. But for her- he might have become President-wars or no wars.
What utter nonsense.
Ooooooohhhhh....*Byron*....silly old bear... Take a bet that POTUS not only *doesn't* implode, but gets a second term?
Scottthedger, it will be FedEx who will absolutely positively drop those blast doors off. Guess who I've worked for - for 13 years?
With us - it will be on time and un-damaged.
of course - I can't spell 'badger'
Well look for them on time then!
I'd argue the point with you, but since it's like wrestling in the mud with a fat chick, won't bother.
Sure, Jay.
Fourteen million illegal immigrant voters would sway a lot of elections, especially if Holder has his way and the Electoral College is abolished.
After all, compared to Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, what did the Founding Fathers know? They were all just white guys.
Uhm...actually MOST law schools have one exam/paper per class. The idea being to prepare you for the zero sum game of the bar exam. As for Harvard having high attrition, check your facts. It's the 16th lowest attrition rate in the country for accredited law schools as of 2009. Less than half a percent of students flunk out. You are wrong.
As for his grades, they are relevant when he puts himself out as a scholar among men.
"<span>As for his grades, they are relevant when he puts himself out as a scholar among men."</span>
She has you there, Bubba. Maybe if he didn't come across as deigning to cast pearls before the swine, and lecturing about basic economics as if we were petulant tenth graders, fewer people would want to see his grades.
I have never considered him all that scholarly, or all that bright. His election just shows the over all stupidity of Americans. It saddens me that the sheeple are so easily manipulated. Nobody asked the tough questions of him. Pathetic really.
Ya know, for all the hue and cry over Palin, and OMG, she is too stupid to be the VP, I consider it an MSM hatchet job. I mean, Palin more stupid than Biden? Biden is pretty damned itiotic. And Palin got McCain votes, she didn't reduce them in the net sum, I think.
Bush's economic policies were better than Oh Blah Blah's, his foreign policy wrt war was, well, not much different minus some nuances (Gitmo, drone missile shoots in Pakistan) and I will venture a guess that w/o the teleprompters, there would be as many gaffs for the press corpse (as an example) to use against the current POTUS as the they did to demean the former. And no matter what he says about what he was left to work with, he decided to crap all over the economy further with all the policies he's shoved down the American's throats and all the political buy outs in the stimulus. Piss poor leadership. I may not appreciate or agree with all Bush wanted to do, but at least I trusted that he loved America. The current president does not make me feel he is any different than some code pink, America-hating puss bag.
It isn't clear how it got into the public domain, but Bush's accademic record is a matter of public record and has been widely reported. Google is your friend. See here:
http://www.insidepolitics.org/heard/heard32300.html
The mainstream media never met a liberal democrat it didn't like, and the more leftist, the more they liked them. The Republicans could persuade Jesus Christ to run and they would get hammered about running an ultri right wing religious fanatic with delusions of grandeur.
Slowly though, the average sheeple has started to learn that their brand of nonsense is just propaganda and not to be believed. But what has started the separation and lack of trust is that the average sheeple also learned they were played for fools and manipulated to do the MSM's bidding. That is what really pissed them off. Some still haven't tumbled to it.
Illegals or not:
"I consider it completely unimportant who in the party will vote, or how; but what is extraordinarily important is this—who will count the votes, and how."
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin
I thought that quote was from David Boies when he went to Florida in 2000....
Didn't you mean to say James Baker?
lol...
URR == always grasping at the silly.... Electoral College abolishment? Where do you get such drivel, is there a corner on townhall.com that I am not aware of? You got your white guy judges under Pres Bush -- be happy.
Post a Comment