let's just say it--Obama doesn't cut it as a leader

Tagged:  

I was having lunch with a friend who had just finished reading Obama's book Dreams from My Father. He was discussing how the book was filled with hate-mongering toward whites. If you've read the book, you know that Obama berates a black male acquaintance for not being a "conscious brother" and speaking like "Beaver Cleaver." He also relates how he stopped making public his mother's race because "by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites." Those are just two of the more tame examples of his stereotyping of whites.

Anyway, during lunch my friend lowered his voice and said something to the effect of "Obama just doesn't have the skills to lead or manage." The content of what he said wasn't news to me, but I thought it was interesting how he felt the need to almost whisper this comment. Hell, why not just state in your normal talking volume the truth about Obama--he's an arrogant, incompetent, cry-baby who conveniently uses his blackness to get ahead or repel criticism.

It's time that we all forget about Obama's black skin and the potential charge of racism when we criticize him. Call us whatever you want when we point out that he is an aloof liberal snob who wants us all to be totally reliant on the government.

Enough of having to whisper our distaste for his lack of leadership and socialistic beliefs. If the only retort the liberals have to this is "you're a racist," well that's their problem.

Enough of having to preface criticism of Obama by saying, "I have a lot of black friends, but...."

There apparently is something genetic with liberals where they believe that blacks are inferior and must be insulated from the expectations that we have for whites. Like the expectation that they have the wherewithall to defend their own political convictions based on the merits. The expectation that they have the intelligence and skills to get ahead in society without the help of government programs. The expectation that they can secure and pay for their own health care, food, housing, etc. The expectation that they can be criticized for things totally unrelated to their skin color.

But then again, there must be something to the fact that minorities consistently vote for these liberals.

Interesting times we live in.

No votes yet

Obama just signed the bill and immediately started spitting and spumming about the cost of the partial shut down. He takes the country for idiots when he doesn't realize we all recognize IT Takes TWO to cause the mess they created. His petulant childish behavior was showcased for all the world to see. Just like 1968 the whole world is watching.

Obama's a pretty good leader... if you're a lemming and don't mind the sudden stop after the long fall.

Obama's talking about how doing business in Washington has to change and regaining the trust of the American people. He's the one who squandered it and now is trying to place the burden on Congress for them to change. Two way frickin street Mr. Time will amplify all the faults in the health care act. It takes awhile to read 3,000 pages that no one has yet - even Congress who passed it. Operationally it has been amatuer hour so far which indicates the real fiasco has yet to come.

He's not saying he doesn't like whites. To "ingratiate" means to try and win favor. He's not saying anything bad about anyone. He's merely saying that people were often surprised to find out he was half white.

Here's the context to one of your cherry-picked quotes.

[W]hat strikes me most when I think about the story of my family is a running strain of innocence, an innocence that seems unimaginable, even by the measures of childhood. My wife's cousin, only six years old, has already lost such innocence. A few weeks ago he reported to his parents that some of his first grade classmates had refused to play with him because of his dark, unblemished skin. Obviously his parents, born and raised in Chicago and Gary, lost their own innocence long ago, and although they aren't bitter — the two of them being as strong and proud and resourceful as any parents I know — one hears the pain in their voices as they begin to have second thoughts about having moved out of the city into a mostly white suburb, a move they made to protect their son from the possibility of being caught in a gang shooting and the certainty of attending an underfunded school.

They know too much, we have all seen too much, to take my parents' brief union — a black man and a white woman, an African and an American — at face value. When people who don't know me well, black or white, discover my background (and it is usually a discovery, for I ceased to advertise my mother's race at the age of twelve or thirteen, when I began to suspect I was ingratiating myself to whites), I see the split-second adjustments they have to make, the searching of my eyes for some telltale sign. They no longer know who I am.

What Obama is saying, which is equally clear with or without the added excerpt, is that when whites find out that he has a white mother--they look at him as being more acceptable than just being a "basic" black man--he's better. In other words, whites are such stupid, knuckle-dragging racists, that he doesn't choose to ingratiate himself to them by explaining that he's half-white.

You’re putting in the racism. Obama is only saying that whenever someone would find out he was half white it was a discovery, because he stopped telling people he was mixed. He didn’t want it to appear that he was trying to win favor with anyone over race. Then, when they did discover, they realized they didn’t know him. He’s not saying anything bad about whites.

of people (primarily liberals) projecting onto BO the person they want him to be, as opposed to who/what he actually is.

I haven't read his books, but have read various excerpts. I have also seen the photo of him going to, if memory serves, his high school prom. The other 3 individuals in the picture were (if memory serves) a white guy and his white girl date, and BO's white girl date. The book(s) supposedly written by Obama, but likely ghost-written, are contrivances. In other words, well though-out-in-advance trickery on behalf of a man aiming for the presidency.

Here's what all the evidence screams to me. This is a guy who didn't see any reason he shouldn't have a white girlfriend, or white female interested in marrying him. When he ran into roadblocks in that area, in my opinion, he got bitter. And over-shadowing all this is that when BO was somewhere between 10 and 13, his (white) grandfather (apparently a communist) let Communist Frank Marshall Davis get his slimy hands on the kid. This guy's real life, as opposed to the fake one he gave out for public consumption in 2008, is tragic in many ways.

And the part about not telling people his mother was white -- HOGWASH! When he ran for president in 2008, his white mother's and white grandparents' pictures were all over TV in ads and courtesy of the mainstream media. There was actually a point when he first appeared on the national scene that I thought his white grandparents had been farmers from Kansas.

I've already posted the info that BO was a CIA asset at a relatively young age. Seriously, wake up and smell the Communist coffee.

You and your friend might do well to take a reading comprehension course. If you actually read the quote about “Tim” the "conscious brother" in context (context meaning the other words around the cherry-picked quote you’re using), you would see that Obama is talking about how he learned a lesson in not putting down another black person, and that he should not judge his fellow students.
Idiots like you that never question the things they hear are quickly exposed. You are exposed. Advise: check things out for yourself so you'll know what you are talking about.

The thing about liberals like Payingmyway, they have learned to detract and spin from the best.

You're just mad because you were caught not actually reading the book you're talking so much about.

I think every American should be required to read Obama's Dreams From My Father book. They would be SHOCKED at what a radical this man is (well, the more informed us of wouldn't be surprised). I always think it's interesting that the title is Dreams FROM My Father instead of Dreams OF My Father. That one word makes a major distinction. It says "I'm advancing/carrying on the radical socialist ideology that my father had," as opposed to simply explaining his father's dreams.

As to Obama's inefectiveness, he's a poor leader not BECAUSE he's black, but he's a poor leader AND he's black. (Another example of one-word distinctions.) I agree that we have to speak our minds and not be bothered by Obama lackeys calling us "racists."

you know the full title is "Dreams From My Father -A Story of Race and Inheritance".

"Dreams" in this case, is used as a metaphor for inheritance- the heritage from his father. Remember, Obama's father was absent from his life from the time he was two years old. Therefore, Obama didn’t have a whole lot of dreams “of ” his father. Much of the book was written from stories his mother and grandparents told him about his father.

This of course isn’t quite as dramatic as your explanation, but I think it's the real one.

While Obama calls press conferences about capitol trials in the sovereign state of Florida, closes national parks, misplays foreign policy in Syria, refuses to even negociate with the elected members of Congress, China's gdp grew 7.8% last quarter. Who side is he on anyway?

If some people think BO is not suceeding as a leader it is because the people who are supposed to help run the country are undermining his leadership every chance they get. It is my opinion that he is one the greatest leaders in the history of the world. He tried to work with the conservatives, but even he knows that the conservatives will oppose any idea that didn't come from their jelly brained membership. So BO set them up. The conservatives think they saved the day. They didn't. Papa BO took them by the hand like anyone would treat a child and showed them how to cross the street and get on the short bus to go to school. Anyone who can't she this should go to the market and get a jar of Smuckers so they can see the portrait of their own brain.

BO also stood firm on Syria to the point where Russia felt the need to get involved, putting pressure on Syria to get rid of their chemical weapons. It was brilliant! BO was able to get one of Syria's strongest allies to agree with us, and stand with him on what he wanted. No military action needed!

He slobbered that up so bad Putin had to and did bail him out. There is a very good reason for having a Sec State. They run the trial balloons and the pres can take whatever action is necessary in a volatile, dynamic situation. Not our boy. He needs to showgun it himself with lines in the sand that he had no business making. Your spin falls as flat as his leadership. America's world stature was weakened.

The best war strategy is the war you don't have to fight. Sounds like brillance to me. Ghanis Kahn used this strategy many times and conquered the most land area in the history of the world.

It wasn’t Putin bailing out Obama; it was Obama giving Putin a way out. Putin would have been obligated to back Syria and their chemical weapons if things went down- something he didn’t want to do on the world stage. Obama knew that and used it to his advantage. Brilliant!

I wanted to let you know that earlier today I received my "Obamacare enrollment packet” from the White House.
It contained:
· An aspirin and a band-aid.
· An 'Obama Hope & Change' bumper sticker
· A 'Bush's Fault' yard sign
· A 'Blame Republicans first, then anybody and everybody' poster
· A 'Tax the Rich' banner
· An application for unemployment and a free cellphone
· An application for food stamps
· A prayer rug
· A letter assigning my debt to my grandchildren
· And lastly, a coupon for a machine that blows smoke up my ass.
Everything was made in "China" and all directions were in Spanish.

Keep an eye out. Yours should be arriving soon.

The Origin of Left & Right...

I have often wondered why it is that Conservatives are called the "right" and Liberals are called the "left." By chance, I stumbled upon this verse in the Bible:
"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left." Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV)

Thus sayeth the Lord. Amen.

It can't get any simpler than that!

*********

Now, A Spelling Lesson

The last four letters in American.......... I CAN
The last four letters in Republican........ I CAN
The last four letters in Democrats......... RATS

End of lesson. Test to follow in November, 2014

Remember, November is to be set aside as rodent removal month.

Spelling lesson :
The middle five letters in Republican........ Pubic.....where the dicks hangout. Very appropriate. Welcome back Fred. LOL

Hope I didn't offend anyone!

What happened to the L spelling wiz? The word would be public, not pubic.
Must be a TPS grad.

The fruits of MY labor are not a social commodity.

Interesting that the comments on this posting from the Obama supporters don't contain actual examples to refute the statement that Obama isn't a leader. Instead, his supporters use the typical liberal tactics of blaming others for his inadequacies (Congress "undermining his leadership"), giving their interpretations of his words, and berating other posters who have an alternative viewpoint.

One can almost feel sorry for these Obama supporters because it is a very big stretch to defend his incompetence..

Maybe the problem is with your original post to this thread. You claimed Obama was a poor leader, but gave no examples. You said you couldn’t give us examples because you would be accused of racism, but gave no examples of that either. The only thing you did do was to make the claim that Obama’s books were full of hate toward whites. As examples for this all you did was post quotes out of context. Give us something to work with, and maybe you will get a better response.

I have no sympathy for blind allegiance to incompetence. They are all firing with wet powder.

Interesting that the comments on this posting from the Obama supporters don't contain actual examples to refute the statement that Obama isn't a leader

What about his handling of Syria's chemical weapons? That was given as an example.

One of the biggest problems I see is that most people WANT to be led by politicians in the first place. These people were NEVER supposed to be considered leaders, or our betters, or superiors, or to lord over us like the subjects we've become. The president isn't supposed to "run" the economy. Congress isn't supposed to "run" the country. The supreme court isn't supposed to rewrite illegal laws so they can pass them. The Federal government is supposed to be doing a very small handful of things as prescribed by the constitution. It was NEVER supposed to affect our daily lives in ANY way shape or form. We should not even be able to notice that there even IS a Federal government operating. And yet, here we are, having our liberties trampled on by the very entity that is supposed to protect said liberties. And all we do is bicker back and forth like a bunch of stupid petulant little children about who we want to "lead" us, who should be "running" the country, or the economy. Which wing of the BIG GOVERNMENT party is going to give us more of other peoples loot, The R's or the D's.
This nation is done for, and we deserve every bad ting that is coming, and we will get it.

The fruits of MY labor are not a social commodity.

You’re right. In this country our “leaders” aren’t supposed to lord over us and be our betters. We don’t have a monarchy, or even the type of republic that a communist country might have. But, there is the job of leadership We The People put our politicians in place to do, hence we call them leaders. We hire them, and want to know if the job of leadership is getting done properly. That is what is being discussed here.

I'm sad to agree, but as a country, we DO deserve "every bad thing that is coming"... and you are correct - it's coming soon, and we WILL get it. I'm not a Boehner fan, but he was correct - we (we the people + conservatives in congress) fought a good fight. But the country cannot survive 3 more years of this goon's presidency.

Furthermore, it's almost useless to tell liberals to read the Constitution, to better understand the limited powers the 3 branches of U.S. govt are SUPPOSED to have. Liberals operate on their emotions only - facts don't bother them. When I first read that Obama is pushing for a new Constitution to be written, I actually thought it was a joke. He's apparently a creation of the rogue part of the CIA [there ARE decent people in that organization] - who lied in spades about his background, and slithered into the presidency on the back of those lies, and appears to be hell bent on destroying this REPUBLIC (liberals will have to look that word up in a dictionary).

And when the U.S. goes under financially, only THEN will liberals start crying, and they will be the ones crying the loudest. That the country has already - as a nation - gone under morally - liberals don't care about that.

We the people ARE the government - the U.S. Constitution makes that plain. These people work for us. I think conservative reps understand that - liberals never will. Here's what they all make in salaries, just as a reminder:

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/governmentjobs/a/Annual-Salaries-Of-Top-Us...

I see most of what liberals do on Capitol Hill in light of those salaries and the endless benefits included. The priorities of most liberals is to hold on to those jobs, with the attendant money and power. They are deathly afraid of living in the economy they have destroyed for the rest of us.

*********************************
An interesting quote from one of the links embedded IN the above link:

“Few federal lawmakers must grapple with the financial ills - unemployment, loss of housing, wiped out savings - that have befallen millions of Americans,” Sheila Krumholz, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, said in announcing the study findings in November 2010.

“Congressional representatives on balance rank among the wealthiest of wealthy Americans and boast financial portfolios that are all but unattainable for most of their constituents.”

Two former loud mouthed supporters - a couple of the first to defect from BO's cadre of mindless minions.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/10/22/jon-stewarts-scathing-obamaca...

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/10/20/oprah-reportedly-declined-whi...

Seems some people only want to be associated with purported winners and quickly turn their backs and run when it gets a little too difficult. That's not the quality of character which built this country.

I enjoyed Stewart's segment. The Obamacare rollout was so incompetent that he could have done an hour segment on just lampooning it.

The Democrats aren't even concerned. Why not? Nobody's stopping them and they know it. That's why I tell people to not only not buy health insurance, but to also not pay the Obamacare fine. Just stop obeying.

Prince Turki al-Faisal called Obama's policies in Syria 'lamentable' and ridiculed a U.S.-Russian deal to eliminate Assad's chemical weapons. He suggested it was a ruse to let Obama avoid military action in Syria.

'The current charade of international control over Bashar's chemical arsenal would be funny if it were not so blatantly perfidious. And designed not only to give Mr. Obama an opportunity to back down (from military strikes), but also to help Assad to butcher his people,' said Prince Turki, a member of the Saudi royal family and former director of Saudi intelligence.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2472680/Saudi-Arabia-severs-dipl...

If the two of you think the action of turning on a friend who has been an ally since 1932 and then forming an alliance with Iran is a good thing, then you both are fools bordering on treason.

Oh boo hoo for the Saudi Royal Family. Obama isn't doing what they want him to do- namely, be their attack dog in the Middle East. No one has turned their back on the Saudi Royals. I’m sure we still have our military protecting their butts from harm. They're still making billions selling us oil, and they’re still our ally (even though they 've proven they'll stab our backs from time to time). We just don’t get into wars as easily as they’d like us to anymore.
Do you think we should attack Syria based on what the Saudis want? Frankly, I’m glad to see The Royals not get their way once in awhile.

"Brilliant!" ? In my best Dirty Harry voice: "Terrific"

What should worry the Obama administration is that Saudi concern about U.S. policy in the Middle East is shared by the four other traditional U.S. allies in the region: Egypt, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates and Israel. They argue (mostly privately) that Obama has shredded U.S. influence by dumping President Hosni Mubarak in Egypt, backing the Muslim Brotherhood’s Mohamed Morsi, opposing the coup that toppled Morsi, vacillating in its Syria policy, and now embarking on negotiations with Iran — all without consulting close Arab allies.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2013/10/23/the-u-s-...

The operative phrase in this piece is that they are all feeling "double crossed." Barry is conducting policy by Chicago ward politics criteria acting as if he can do whatever the hell he wants with no regard for anyone else. The USA will pay a price for his arrogance in the short future.

Would you like to see us take military action in Syria based on what the Saudis want? Or, would you like to see another approach tried first?

“It’s important that the president of the United States shows up at these meetings,” she said.

“The Chinese president, Xi Jinping, showed up. Russian President Vladimir Putin showed up, and they were able to dominate the proceedings,” Clinton said, “and they were able to cock an eyebrow and ask a question like, well, maybe we can’t count on the Americans any more. Maybe it’s time to, in the words of one Chinese official, de-Americanize the world. Maybe we should even start thinking about a different reserve currency than the American dollar.”
A quote from the Hills at the University at Buffalo yesterday. Even your own Democrats are noting the quality of leadership from BO.

I think you have it wrong. I believe this was Hillary talking about how Obama had to deal with the GOP shut down, canceling a trip to Asia. You took this out of context. She wasn't comenting on BOs leadership. She was talking more about how the shutdown and other obstructionist BS makes us look unreliable to the world.

Feeble excuse. The president's job is to lead and represent US interests world wide. He got an F. The reason is immaterial.

Good job sidestepping the fact that you got caught quoting Clinton out of context. Even if you don’t agree with someone, it’s pretty low to change the meaning of what they are saying. That type of thing spreads misinformation.

You still haven’t answered the question. Do you want to bomb Syria?

This development has been foretold and warned about for some time. Just how do you "Brilliant," observers respond to the strong arm extortions in the region when they have a deliverable weapon?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/10/24/iran-bomb-one-month-...

Giving in to the strong arm extortion practices in the region of the Saudis trying to get us to attack Syria, or maybe kill some protesters in Bahrain is certainly not the answer. I say don’t listen to the Saudis for a change.

As far as Iran, I say keep the communication going, and stand behind Obama. War should be the last resort. Of course this is another case where the Saudis are having a temper tantrum. Darn those monarchs. They just always want to have everything their way.

What you've said is a little annoying. War shouldn't even be an option. Iran hasn't attacked us. You're implying that it's OK to attack them instead for merely obtaining the weapon systems that we already have, have deployed, and have even used in anger.

If you won't honor the sovereignty of other nations, then you're the bad guy. It doesn't matter what justification you bloviate about.

Maybe I didn’t make myself clear. I don’t want any war! That is why I support talking to Iran and not going into Syria. If you have been following the thread, you should know I support Obama getting together with Russia on the issue of Syria. And, I support talking with Iran. The Saudis had a fit recently because they wanted us to attack Syria and not talk with Iran. I’m against letting the Saudis influence our foreign policy, especially when it means attacking someone. I believe in war only in defense. Please read all the posts.

It’s not so much that we would attack Iran; Israel could end up doing it if Iran looks like they are getting a weapon. Talking with Iran could hopefully prevent such a thing.

The ironic thing here being, Israel is a known nuclear-weapon power (estimates vary between 100 and 200 deployed nuclear weapons) and has more than demonstrated its hostility in the Middle East, and has even attacked the United States via the USS Liberty in 1967.

But never mind that, I guess. They get a pass, and we all know why. It rhymes with "Yews". And Iran doesn't get a pass, and your hint there rhymes with "Scarabs". (Note: Iranians are primarily Persian, not rhymes-with-scarabs.)

I say again: There's no need to be in "talks" with Iran over their nuclear program. Sovereign nations have every right to produce nuclear power and nuclear weapons... just like we have. There's nothing to talk about. Just leave them alone.

I actually agree with you that sovereign nations have the right to do what they want. And, yes it is ironic that Israel has nukes and always gets a pass. In a perfect world everyone would see this. Unfortunately in the world that exists now, Israel will most likely attack Iran if Iran ever makes a nuke, or if they even appear to have one. Opening up communications with Iran is a whole lot better than declaring them part of an axis of evil and leaving it at that.

Cheney said he didn’t have a lot of confidence in the ability of the Obama administration to negotiate an agreement with Iran over its nuclear program, a skepticism he said is shared by officials in the Middle East.

“They’re very fearful that the whole Iranian exercise is going to go the same way as the Syrian exercise, that is, that there will be bold talk from the administration,” Cheney said. “But in the final analysis, nothing effective will be done about the Iranian program.”

In response to a question on whether military action against Iran was inevitable, Cheney said “I have trouble seeing how we’re going to achieve our objective short of that.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-27/king-says-obama-should-stop-apo...

I certainly don't put forth that I know more about this situation than a former Vice-President of the United States. How about you?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.