Am I intepreting this correctly???

[Lunkerdog]

It seems to me that these historians are saying that Obama isn't the man for the job. Am I getting it right? Or am I just following my instincts because I don't believe he is?

http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/07/...ss_igoogle_cnn

[kansasdeerhunter]

I think they're saying he's failed to be that person. Regardless I don't like the pro-big government feel of the article. We don't need a stronger government to fix our problems, we need a smaller government that sticks to only what it was founded for and doesn't spend us into oblivion...imo

[RobertSubnet]

Obama hasn't used the powers of the presidency to break through the debt ceiling gridlock, Koehn says, by talking directly to the American people about the stakes involved.
"For all of his presidency, he has never given evidence that he trusted the people to consistently bring them into his confidence and explain the connections," Koehn says. "He's never gone to the people and said, 'I need your help.' It's a huge, missed opportunity on his part."

It is a good thing Obama has not tried "talking directly to the American people." Most people find him to be some combination of condescending and professorial. As for myself every time I see him strike up the nose in the air, fearless leader pose I want to punch him in the face.

[Fieldmouse]

They have been way too many lies coming out of his mouth when talking to the American people. He's fresh out of them or else you would hear specifics. Notice, nothing has been put on the table by either the White House or the Senate. NOTHING!

[sachiko]

Originally Posted by Fieldmouse

Notice, nothing has been put on the table by either the White House or the Senate. NOTHING!

There is a reason for this strategy. If the Republicans in the House are forced to produce a "compromise" solution, they can be blamed for anything that goes wrong.

This is the reason the House Republicans should stick to their guns and insist on their own agenda. If they're going to be blamed anyway, it might as well be for their own plan.

[Alsatian]

Originally Posted by sachiko

There is a reason for this strategy. If the Republicans in the House are forced to produce a "compromise" solution, they can be blamed for anything that goes wrong.

This is the reason the House Republicans should stick to their guns and insist on their own agenda. If they're going to be blamed anyway, it might as well be for their own plan.

Yes, the Republicans should stick to their guns. Alternatively, they could offer a limited debt ceiling increase tied to equivalent REAL spending cuts NOW -- for example a 1 trillion dollar ceiling raise linked to a 1 trillion dollar spending cut from their own budget. Then if Obama and the Senate democrats don't go for it, I think the Republicans could fairly just sit back and wait.

Let's put this in perspective. The Democrats have NOT voted a budget since Obama came into office. We are working under continuing funding resolutions. This kind of invites the application of the label "HYPOCRITE" on Obama when he says we are a big league nation and big league nations don't resort to stop-gap measures such as a short term debt ceiling increase. Do big league governments operate without budgets and operate under continuing funding resolutions? That is just a subterfuge to avoid being accountable for their bogus spending decisions.

[Alsatian]

Originally Posted by Fieldmouse

They have been way too many lies coming out of his mouth when talking to the American people. He's fresh out of them or else you would hear specifics. Notice, nothing has been put on the table by either the White House or the Senate. NOTHING!

Exactly. The bully pulpit for Obama doesn't work anymore. The only people listening to him are the Democrat base and the mainstream news media. He is a joke. I do not trust ANYTHING that comes out of his mouth. He is about as disingenuous and mendacious as any politician I have ever had the displeasure to observe.