MSNBC Trashes Obama's Address: Compared To Carter, "I Don't Sense Executive Command"

[Sarge]

MSNBC Trashes Obama's Address: Compared To Carter, "I Don't Sense Executive Command"

When you've lost Comrade Olbermann, Herr Matthews and MSNBC, you're in deep dooky

Unfortunately, that means we're all in deep dooky.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...to_carter_i_dont_sense_executive_command.html

 

[Lanky Livingston]

He actually said last night, we are going to get this country where we want it. We don't know what that is, or how to get there, but we will get there. (paraphrased)

I mean...really? I can't even defend Obama at all anymore, its pathetic.

 

[riggins44]

Can we do a trade package with Obama and Haynesworth?

 

[Sarge]

He actually said last night, we are going to get this country where we want it. We don't know what that is, or how to get there, but we will get there. (paraphrased)

I mean...really? I can't even defend Obama at all anymore, its pathetic.

What scares me is, where does he want it?

I mean, I think I know, and frankly it scares me, but has he even given us his vision of where he wants things to be? Aside from platitude filled speeches about rivers of chocolate nad streets of gold?

And as far as this situation goes, it's not really his fault. He has no leadership experience. Maybe if he had joined the military instead of sitting around smoking weed (Oopps, bad old Sarge. BAD!!!!!)

Maybe if he had done something in his life besides be an activist and organizer and quasi-professor, he be a little more on the ball or have more of a clue.

Some of us tried to tell people. Unfortuntely, this is the end result of electing someone because they're "cool".

 

[Elephant]

Ordinarily I watch most Presidential speeches if I have the opportunity. I feel it is my responsibility. But for days leading up to this Oval Office Speech, Obama had made numerous appearances and addressed numerous crowds in the Gulf telling them all everything was going to be OK. I guess I can't fault him for trying to assure those affected that he was on top of things.

The problem I had, and the reason I refused to watch last night is because it was typical Barack Hussein Obama! There's a problem, let's go out on the Campaign Trail and make appearances, read from a teleprompter or take softball questions from crowds that they screen in an effort to avoid the tough questions.

 

[Henry]

I didn't watch the speech last night. Has the leak been plugged?

(that was a rhetorical question)

 

[Sarge]

It's not a leak, its a "damn hole"

And I wish it was plugged. And I don't care who does it either, be it Klinton or Cheney

We can figure out who to sue later

 

[Yusuf06]

Let's look at this objectively for a moment. Obama has made some missteps in this crisis but the one basic, unalterable, and unavoidable fact is that the Feds have zero, zilch, ningún ability to plug this leak and probably not enough capacity to control the spread of the oil. The technology, equipment and know how to plug the leak is all on BP. So Obama is in a position where the only thing he really can do is pretend to be in charge and verbally flog BP about the head and shoulder area repeatedly.

Moreover, the same would be equally true if McCain were POTUS. Perhaps the only difference is that McCain probably wouldn't be trying to subject a good upstanding company like BP to a Chicago style shakedown.

My ideal scenario for Obama to manage this crisis would be for him to in essence give Jindal and Louisiana the middle finger.... "Hey, aren't you the guy who just said you wanted more drilling and that you oppose the Democratic view that the way to strengthen our country is to increase dependence on government?" Well, here you go Now deal with your oil spill on your own.

Obviously that's never going to happen but I can dream.

 

[Elephant]

...

My ideal scenario for Obama to manage this crisis would be for him to in essence give Jindal and Louisiana the middle finger.... "Hey, aren't you the guy who just said you wanted more drilling and that you oppose the Democratic view that the way to strengthen our country is to increase dependence on government?" Well, here you go Now deal with your oil spill on your own.

Obviously that's never going to happen but I can dream.

Objectively? Give me a break! That was about as partisan a statement as anyone could make!

See this is the typical response from people who won't see things the way they really are. The argument that Jindal and many other conservatives who are tired of seeing more and more governmental intrusion is LIMITED Federal Government, not NO Big Government. There is a need for the Federal Government and no one is suggesting such a thing Yusuf!

This is a scenario where the Federal Government should have stepped in. Jindal is restricted by Federal regulations with the methods he can employ, i.e. building dunes to protect the shoreline. Jindal has no power to temporarily suspend the Jones Act so foreign vessels could have come in within the first week to assist in the cleanup.

So this fallacious argument, "Oh now you're crying for Federal relief" is a total misunderstanding or misrepresentation of the conservative belief and Constitutional Law. Ridiculous of you or anybody else to make such a claim and you should be ashamed of yourself for making it!

 

[Lanky Livingston]

Bottom line: the only thing that's going to stop this disaster are the relief wells, and those aren't going to be completed for awhile (I think I've heard December-January as potential dates). I agree with Yusuf - Obama should not be giving BP the business like he is - but the government should also not have given Toyota the business like it did. Both companies employ thousands of Americans.

Obama and the Federal gov't CAN'T do anything to stop this leak. There is nothing to be done except drill the relief wells, and hope like hell they're on target. The highly irresponsible moratorium on offshore drilling was NOT the answer, and is going to cost 150K+ jobs. Not to mention, all the rigs are going to head to Brazil, and we're not going to be able to drill here for 2 years minimum even if Obama lifts the ban in the next few months. This also means our gas prices are going to skyrocket. You thought $4 a gallon was bad? Just wait til it hits $7-8 a gallon, maybe even $10, without producing our own oil.

 

[Yusuf06]

Objectively? Give me a break! That was about as partisan a statement as anyone could make!

See this is the typical response from people who won't see things the way they really are. The argument that Jindal and many other conservatives who are tired of seeing more and more governmental intrusion is LIMITED Federal Government, not NO Big Government. There is a need for the Federal Government and no one is suggesting such a thing Yusuf!

This is a scenario where the Federal Government should have stepped in. Jindal is restricted by Federal regulations with the methods he can employ, i.e. building dunes to protect the shoreline. Jindal has no power to temporarily suspend the Jones Act so foreign vessels could have come in within the first week to assist in the cleanup.

So this fallacious argument, "Oh now you're crying for Federal relief" is a total misunderstanding or misrepresentation of the conservative belief and Constitutional Law. Ridiculous of you or anybody else to make such a claim and you should be ashamed of yourself for making it!

I'd like to be able to say I was merely exagerating to make a point. Unfortunately, that's pretty much how I really feel about it. I realize the Feds do have certain responsibilities but when your state's representatives make a living out of rubber stamping anything the oil industry wants, then whining that "our way of life is at stake" it makes it awfully hard for me to care much. After all, is it unreasonable to expect them to think about the risks to their way of life before something like this happens?

Is this really misrepresenting the far right's position when the tea baggers are out there proposing foolishness like abolishing the Federal Reserve, taking away natural born citizenship, and getting rid of social security, etc.? That sort thing makes me feel a little entitled to a bit of an extreme view here and there myself. Besides, the irony of Jindal taking such a public stance in favor of rugged individualism while taking credit at photo ops with giant cardboard stimulus checks and later begging the Feds for help is just too rich to ignore. In short, I guess it just boils down to my view that the tea baggers and the like are staunch constitutional constructionists...well until they're not. *cough* hypocritical *cough* Give me a break.

As for the partisan comment, you're pretty far afield there. I'm a former Republican, now and likely always, without a party. As such, I reserve the right to call 'em as I see 'em. Right now though he's far from perfect, Obama is about the only grownup in government these days.

 

[Yusuf06]

The highly irresponsible moratorium on offshore drilling was NOT the answer, and is going to cost 150K+ jobs. Not to mention, all the rigs are going to head to Brazil, and we're not going to be able to drill here for 2 years minimum even if Obama lifts the ban in the next few months. This also means our gas prices are going to skyrocket. You thought $4 a gallon was bad? Just wait til it hits $7-8 a gallon, maybe even $10, without producing our own oil.

I can understand how many people think this way. However, how responsible would it be to continue with business as usual without some understanding of what went wrong, an incompetent materials management agency, and most importantly with all resources tied up with responding to the current spill. Under those circumstances even another small incident could be a huge disaster, economically, politically and otherwise. Furthermore, any administration that chose not to impose a moratorium under those circumstances would be at best reckless and at worst foolish.

Gas prices might increase a bit but I doubt the scenario you envision is likely. Remember, this isn't shutting down existing rigs, only drilling of new wells. A lot depends on how many wells are nearing the end of their useful lives, consumption rates etc. Also don't forget that oil is a global commodity. No matter where it's drilled it will end up on the global market and will affect the supply/demand ratio and hence the price. Besides, I happen to think that within reason, rising gas prices are in many ways a good thing.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

We know what went wrong. BP acted irresponsibly, and chose schedule and budget over safety.

 

[Yusuf06]

Agreed, and yet that only scratches the surface. Without a housecleaning at materials management we won't know the process issues that contributed. Both sides of that equation take time. Six months is probably not enough time to complete either but that's probably about as much time as is possible.

 

[Elephant]

Yusuf: I'd like to be able to say I was merely exagerating to make a point. Unfortunately, that's pretty much how I really feel about it.

El:This completely undermines your first statement about being objective.

Yusuf: I realize the Feds do have certain responsibilities but when your state's representatives make a living out of rubber stamping anything the oil industry wants, then whining that "our way of life is at stake" it makes it awfully hard for me to care much. After all, is it unreasonable to expect them to think about the risks to their way of life before something like this happens?

El:Haha! Yeah, Jindal was rubber stamping everything. I am not going to claim Jindal was not favoring oil companies since they bring in billions in jobs and tax revenues to the State, the majority of people in Louisiana still want these companies there. Oh and as far as Jindal's responsibility, how do you expalin the Federal agency responsible for oversight not properly regulating the deep water drilling? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/24/AR2010052401974.html


Yusuf: Is this really misrepresenting the far right's position when the tea baggers are out there proposing foolishness like abolishing the Federal Reserve, taking away natural born citizenship, and getting rid of social security, etc.?

El: See, you were talking about Bobby Jindal here and I was talking about Conservatives, yet you immediately begin talking about the "extreme right".

Yusuf: That sort thing makes me feel a little entitled to a bit of an extreme view here and there myself. Besides, the irony of Jindal taking such a public stance in favor of rugged individualism while taking credit at photo ops with giant cardboard stimulus checks and later begging the Feds for help is just too rich to ignore. In short, I guess it just boils down to my view that the tea baggers and the like are staunch constitutional constructionists...well until they're not. *cough* hypocritical *cough* Give me a break.

El: Here is a disparaging term you use to describe your opposition. This is a the sort of tactic that one with no valuable discourse uses.

Yusuf: As for the partisan comment, you're pretty far afield there. I'm a former Republican, now and likely always, without a party. As such, I reserve the right to call 'em as I see 'em. Right now though he's far from perfect, Obama is about the only grownup in government these days.

El: Former Republican or not, your post is ripe with Partisanship.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

El, you can bash a party without being partisan. Partisan means you support one party over another - which if you bash all parties equally, you are certainly not doing.

 

[Yusuf06]

Here is a disparaging term you use to describe your opposition. This is a the sort of tactic that one with no valuable discourse uses.

I tend to try to match my response to the "needs" of the recipient and in this case I think I even toned down my opinion of them a bit. If the tea baggers had good ideas and were making legitimate arguments based on logic rather than Birch Society-esque conspiracy theories, I'd give them respect without regard to my agreement with their positions. As it stands, the best I can do is to avoid explicitly calling them simpletons. Damn, now see what you went and made me do.

But since I've already let loose, I might as well just let 'er rip. The only difference between the tea baggers and say, these guys is which side of the Luddite coin they're on. Sorry but I simply can't take dullards like this seriously. That some segment of the country is currently doing so with the tea baggers worries me greatly.

 

[Elephant]

I tend to try to match my response to the "needs" of the recipient and in this case I think I even toned down my opinion of them a bit. If the tea baggers had good ideas and were making legitimate arguments based on logic rather than Birch Society-esque conspiracy theories, I'd give them respect without regard to my agreement with their positions. As it stands, the best I can do is to avoid explicitly calling them simpletons. Damn, now see what you went and made me do.

But since I've already let loose, I might as well just let 'er rip. The only difference between the tea baggers and say, these guys is which side of the Luddite coin they're on. Sorry but I simply can't take dullards like this seriously. That some segment of the country is currently doing so with the tea baggers worries me greatly.

You did not "tone down" anything when you refer to a legitimate ground swelling movement that has influenced many elections in the last 6 months as "Tea Baggers". This is the same type of nonsense someone like Rachel Maddow spews to minimize their influence. It is the same sort of tactic someone like Glenn Beck uses to minimize the extreme views of someone like Rahm Emmanuel and the entire Obama Administration by linking him to Saul Alinsky.

Neither represents either side accurately. There are extremists on both sides and for you to suggest the entire Tea Party movement is anything other than something it is not is dishonest at best! Partisan!

 

[Lanky Livingston]

There are extremists on both sides and for you to suggest the entire Tea Party movement is anything other than something it is not is dishonest at best! Partisan!

Again, that is not partisan El.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

Kinda like libtard?