this whole thing is more twisted than a color TV
Sure.Can you just for once and in a non joking way point out something he has done wrong? I haven't ever seen you write anything like that.
He allowed the Democratic Congress to determine the nuts and bolts of the Stimulus relying too much on the concept that merely pumping 800 billion into the economy was enough; not caring how it was spent nor how to target the tax relief in the law.
He played footsie forever over Gitmo instead of just realizing his campaign promise was unworkable and eating it.
He continued profligate spending without increasing revenue.
He presented a meaningless joke of a budget prior to the so-called Ryan Plan for purely political purposes.
He took control of the Census instead of leaving it where it belonged in the Commerce Department.
He refuses to stand up to Israel in any meaningful way and prove the United States can be a fair arbiter of that dispute.
As far as I can tell, he has no cohesive energy strategy and is nothing but platitudes on that front at a time when it is one of the most pressing issues we face.
On health insurance reform he made too many deals up front in an attempt to get the private sector on board instead of dealing with the Republican minority on the issue (granted, that may have been pointless since they have no interest in effective governing but he should have gone there first).
Moss grows on his veto pen.
He allowed France and the UK to take the lead on how to address Libya and got the United States involved in a conflict with no obvious benefit while we are currently trying to complete the endgame on two different fronts. The cover for this was (in my opinion) a pathetic claim that the strategy for the Middle East has changed to a quasi-Bush reverse domino theory but instead of pushing Jeffersonian democracy through the barrel of a gun, we will just pick the side of "freedom" even though we are using guns. I could go on a long time with the problems I have with the precipitous action in Libya. I think it was his biggest blunder so far and it made the United States look weak politically and militarily.
Enough or do you need more?
I don't know that it is or isn't true. I don't like unnamed sources, and the Clintons certainly aren't above this type of marketing for a cause.
However, I also don't see any proof that it is fiction. Those that support the Administration would be quick to dismiss the article as fiction, without any evidence of same, because it fits their preconceived view, to an extent, of their candidate. Although Obama the candidate would have negotiated Osama's surrender.
Along comes a fictional "out" for them because they cannot honesty disapprove of the elimination of bin Laden and the complaints about pictures and burial sound pathetically petty. Happy-magic-presto! It turns out he didn't do it at all so we can all go to sleep happy.
Something like that, anyway.
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|