what are barack obama's flaws?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (2104 of them)

might not be able to tame congress and end up like Clinton in 1994

Catsupppppppppppppp dude 茄蕃, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 20:54 (6 years ago) Permalink

Also a bit of what deez said - I'm worried he's setting himself up to disappoint everyone.

Hurting 2, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 20:54 (6 years ago) Permalink

has convinved people like me to be largely uninterested in this question

gabbneb, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 20:55 (6 years ago) Permalink

He has a bit of this tendency to come off like "I fully understand this problem because I've read many essays about it." Which makes me like him and wince at the same time.

Hurting 2, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 20:57 (6 years ago) Permalink

if he gets elected, pulls us out of iraq, closes gitmo, and restores civil liberties to their pre-9/11 status, and then ta-da something actually blows up, how many times is he going to say "uh um" during the press conference in which he capitulates to the chickenhawks in both parties screaming for his head

It's hard to see how staying in Iraq is helping to prevent domestic terrorism. Even McCain wants to close Gitmo. I doubt civil liberties will go all the way back to pre-9/11 status, and not sure if Obama is even suggesting that they should

o. nate, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 20:58 (6 years ago) Permalink

has convinved people like me to be largely uninterested in this question

-- gabbneb, Wednesday, April 30, 2008 8:55 PM (7 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

shock of shocks

deeznuts, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:04 (6 years ago) Permalink

what elmo and tom said, basically--the dude comes across as too trusting in america's ability to be smart about shit

-- max, Wednesday, April 30, 2008 8:48 PM (16 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

i really want to believe this is true, but it sounds the kind of bs that be lipped by his supporters - his flaw is that he's TOO right about everything? ill take that.

deeznuts, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:07 (6 years ago) Permalink

foreign policy naivete. biggest thing that worries me about him by far. if he gets elected, pulls us out of iraq, closes gitmo, and restores civil liberties to their pre-9/11 status, and then ta-da something actually blows up, how many times is he going to say "uh um" during the press conference in which he capitulates to the chickenhawks in both parties screaming for his head

-- El Tomboto, Wednesday, April 30, 2008 4:45 PM (22 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

this is more lol gwb put u in a jackpot sry!

jhøshea, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:09 (6 years ago) Permalink

i am really curious as to what hes gonna do w/the gitmo dudes who we have evidence against thats inadmissible due to torture tho

jhøshea, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:10 (6 years ago) Permalink

i wonder about his ability/willingness to get his hands dirty and wrestle things to the ground. saying you're willing to talk to iran/hamas/whoever is all well and good, but if you go into those situations you have to go in saying, "here's the deal: you can get this and this, you can't get this and this, and we're going to have to fight about this and this -- but if the fight goes on too long, you get nothing." the bushies have been terrible at that stuff, so it's not like the bar is set particularly high, but it would be nice to have someone who can actually get some things done. (wouldn't have to be him personally, but he'd need some hardball players around who knew how to do that.) (same applies in dealing with congress, obviously.)

tipsy mothra, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:11 (6 years ago) Permalink

deex -- i didn't say he's overly correct, but i think he may be presumptuous that America will be eager or grateful about implementing the changes he wants

elmo argonaut, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:12 (6 years ago) Permalink

also I am dead serious that his uh um uh tic that he has when you can tell he's thinking on his feet is really not reassuring at all

El Tomboto, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:13 (6 years ago) Permalink

he actually comes across as a guy who would be an absolute expert at that kind of stuff to me tipsy

deeznuts, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:13 (6 years ago) Permalink

yah he def should cut that out xp

jhøshea, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:14 (6 years ago) Permalink

nodding slowly and looking thoughtful is the way to go

jhøshea, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:15 (6 years ago) Permalink

his uh um uh tic that he has when you can tell he's thinking on his feet

this doesn't bother me so much -- it's campaign season and he has to be excruciatingly calculating about his diction. when he speaks off the cuff he gets in trouble, but really only because he running for office

elmo argonaut, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:15 (6 years ago) Permalink

or alternatively quit being so optimistic about your fellow humans that you keep getting surprised by shit, like Wright dropping an atom bomb on you on national television

El Tomboto, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:16 (6 years ago) Permalink

xp Still, I think Hillary is a better extemporaneous speaker.

jaymc, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:17 (6 years ago) Permalink

his almost musical hand-gesture of 'conducting' a discussion / 'putting a fine point' on an argument

it's like the new bubba remote

elmo argonaut, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:17 (6 years ago) Permalink

I don't think Tom's point is that Obama is going to cause terrorism to happen, just that when it does he's going to look bad.

Hurting 2, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:18 (6 years ago) Permalink

you guys all seem to think obama waaaaaaaaay less pragmatic than i do, i guess

deeznuts, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:18 (6 years ago) Permalink

I actually HOPE he's more cynical and pragmatic than I'm giving him credit for.

Hurting 2, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:19 (6 years ago) Permalink

eh tom did begin his post w/"foreign policy naivete." soo...

jhøshea, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:19 (6 years ago) Permalink

I don't think Tom's point is that Obama is going to cause terrorism to happen, just that when it does he's going to look bad.

-- Hurting 2, Wednesday, April 30, 2008 9:18 PM (9 seconds ago) Bookmark Link

isnt this precisely cuz its easy to paint him as a pussy/pushover, which you guys all seem to be buying into?? i think hes far from either of those things. and i dont mean to draw this into electability issues, just that im more interested in what might be lurking behind the 'optimist' facade

deeznuts, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:20 (6 years ago) Permalink

i mean, this guy is naive?? he comes across as a freaking borderline genius to me

deeznuts, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:21 (6 years ago) Permalink

The Bush adminstration has done so much to restore if not empower the executive branch that I doubt President McCain, Clinton, or Obama would be so eager to rescind those powers -- why would you?

I wish he was an atheist -- with his oratorical skills he could do lots for the millions of us who want to hear a convincing defense of godlessness put to theists. And yet, and yet, I suspect he IS less of a god-fearing man than he pretends. Something about his preternatural coolness bespeaks a kind of deism.

Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:23 (6 years ago) Permalink

might not be able to tame congress and end up like Clinton in 1994

Can't see that happening. He's got too many friends there already on both sides. Senators apparently luv the dude.

xp Still, I think Hillary is a better extemporaneous speaker.

unless you ask her about bill's position on nafta and she goes into that uncomfortable cackle that's soooo painful to watch.

kenan, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:23 (6 years ago) Permalink

just a little armchair psychoanalysis, let's all be cool

elmo argonaut, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:24 (6 years ago) Permalink

its funny how everyone buys the optimist/naivety package - its a symptom of dumb cynicism - those two really dont have to come together

jhøshea, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:25 (6 years ago) Permalink

in fact i bet that obama is closer to the optimist/cynic model

jhøshea, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:25 (6 years ago) Permalink

its funny how everyone buys the optimist/naivety package

^^^. The right wing has been all "SEE? SEE? AUDACITY OF HOPE MY ASS!" the last couple of weeks; they've accepted the narrative that Obama is a New Kind of Politician. To me he's "new" only in that he understands the importance of words and is uncommonly quick-witted.

Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:26 (6 years ago) Permalink

yeah i dunno if thats directed at me or not but i agree -- im not saying i dont believe the guy isnt genuinely optimistic, but i def dont believe he's remotely naive, like not even remotely remotely xps to jhoshea

deeznuts, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:27 (6 years ago) Permalink

not directed at u in the slightest deez

jhøshea, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:29 (6 years ago) Permalink

paranoid/optimist ^^^ lol

jhøshea, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:29 (6 years ago) Permalink

More on Obama & civil liberties: he voted to make permanent all but two of the PATRIOT act provisions that had been originally passed with an expiration date - so not exactly a wide-eyed innocent on that front.

o. nate, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:34 (6 years ago) Permalink

i mean, this guy is naive?? he comes across as a freaking borderline genius to me

Early on I thought he came off as naive when he said that having lived abroad was a foreign policy credential. Like not only naive for thinking that (which he might not have, really), but naive for thinking it sounded good.

Hurting 2, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:42 (6 years ago) Permalink

i really don't think disappointments with an obama presidency will be with character flaws per se.

something that occasionally makes me uneasy about his campaign rhetoric is that he'll elide the differences between kinds of identity, most problematically ethnic and economic identities. being Latino isn't really like being rich even though there's a fair degree of mystification cast over class as culture in this country. i don't really know where i'm going with this; it fits his overall message well to talk about the poor/rich divide as bridgeable, but that's a divide that economic policy should be targeted at eliminating or at least bringing closer, it's not like the problem is, oh if only poor people and rich people could just sit down over coffee and talk.

horseshoe, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:48 (6 years ago) Permalink

which i'm sure he knows and in part he's hemmed in by the landmine that is talking about class in America.

horseshoe, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:50 (6 years ago) Permalink

oh if only poor people and rich people could just sit down over coffee and talk.

-- horseshoe, Wednesday, April 30, 2008 5:48 PM (5 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

Hurting 2, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:54 (6 years ago) Permalink

(ahem, not that I've seen it.)

Hurting 2, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:55 (6 years ago) Permalink

isn't the deal with character flaws you see powerfully ten years after that they're the things you saw as VIRTUES at the time

no one's going to be lookin back at president two-term obama and sayin "yes how did i not see he was naive?" -- what will piss you off abt him will be a quality you were pleased abt back when you voted for him

mark s, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:56 (6 years ago) Permalink

he will beat me in basketball and steal my girlfriend

jhøshea, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:56 (6 years ago) Permalink

maybe but i was really (maybe willfully?) blind to the bill clinton is untrustworthy thing in the 90s. i can see how it was the flipside of his charm in retrospect, i guess.

xpost

horseshoe, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:57 (6 years ago) Permalink

edwards was better at talking about class that obama, as i remember, but i also think its "easier" to talk about class as a white guy than it is as a black guy

max, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:57 (6 years ago) Permalink

and the flip side of that was that edwards was no good at talking about race.

max, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:58 (6 years ago) Permalink

uh, whatever that would mean, i guess

max, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:58 (6 years ago) Permalink

I wish he was an atheist -- with his oratorical skills he could do lots for the millions of us who want to hear a convincing defense of godlessness put to theists. And yet, and yet, I suspect he IS less of a god-fearing man than he pretends. Something about his preternatural coolness bespeaks a kind of deism.

I kind of like to think that Barack Obama's reasonable optimism is engendering a sort of secular spirituality in the country.

Curt1s Stephens, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:59 (6 years ago) Permalink

it pretty funny fighting bill clinton and being all ooooh yah ok now i see why he got under yr skin so bad

jhøshea, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:59 (6 years ago) Permalink

i really want obama to give a truth bomb class speech like he did with race. lol campaign fan fiction.

xposts

horseshoe, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 21:59 (6 years ago) Permalink

also easier to 'talk about class' when you're never gonna be Prez and just want to influence the debate

gabbneb, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 22:00 (6 years ago) Permalink

Those song mash-ups, maybe--he'll be singing "Fancy" or "Blurred Lines" or "Call Me Maybe" staccato.

clemenza, Friday, 22 August 2014 02:09 (4 weeks ago) Permalink

The first part of this is depressing to revisit, but lol at max's vivid fanfic from April 30, 2008

Karl Malone, Friday, 22 August 2014 02:10 (4 weeks ago) Permalink

This thread, I meant

Karl Malone, Friday, 22 August 2014 02:10 (4 weeks ago) Permalink

the audacity of hope

the late great, Friday, 22 August 2014 03:49 (4 weeks ago) Permalink

'likeable enough'

j., Friday, 22 August 2014 03:56 (4 weeks ago) Permalink

3 weeks pass...

so now he's just going and betraying the constitution

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/12/opinion/obamas-betrayal-of-the-constitution.html?smid=tw-share&_r=4

reggie (qualmsley), Friday, 12 September 2014 15:42 (1 week ago) Permalink

BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Friday, 12 September 2014 16:52 (1 week ago) Permalink

yea this whole thing has been wildly disappointing, some victories aside. should've known better though than to expect a lot. also he was still the best electable person running in 08, doesn't say much though.

marcos, Friday, 12 September 2014 16:55 (1 week ago) Permalink

my favorite thing on earth is the hilary fans in my life keening for the day she's president, as though she'd lead us into the light rather than tweak the crosshairs

BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Friday, 12 September 2014 22:29 (1 week ago) Permalink

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/the-meltdown/

Mordy, Friday, 12 September 2014 22:54 (1 week ago) Permalink

i know a lot of enthusiastic pro-hillary dems but they're probably to the right of yr hillary fans

Mordy, Friday, 12 September 2014 22:54 (1 week ago) Permalink

I'm not sure I agree with the estimable Commentary writer about the missile shield/Poland and citing Israel's disappointment re our changing Iran policy.

guess that bundt gettin eaten (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 12 September 2014 23:49 (1 week ago) Permalink

Yet, with the qualified exception of the liberal-democratic model, each of these systems wound up collapsing of its own weight—precisely the reason Dean Acheson, Harry Truman, Winston Churchill, and the other postwar statesmen “present at the creation” understood the necessity of the Truman Doctrine, the Atlantic Alliance, containment, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, and all the rest of the institutional and ideological architecture of America’s post–World War II leadership. These were men who knew that isolationism, global-disarmament pledges, international law, or any other principle based on “common humanity” could provide no lasting security against ambitious dictatorships and conniving upstarts. The only check against disorder and anarchy was order and power. The only hope that order and power would be put to the right use was to make sure that a preponderance of power lay in safe, benign, and confident hands.

ok stop

guess that bundt gettin eaten (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 12 September 2014 23:51 (1 week ago) Permalink

obv there's plenty to disagree w/ there - commentary is not exactly ilx-spectrum politics. but i think there's a strong case there too, or at least a fun enough one to read that it deserves inclusion on this illustrious thread.

Mordy, Saturday, 13 September 2014 00:06 (1 week ago) Permalink

hasn't morphed into Dysentery yet?

son of a lewd monk (Dr Morbius), Saturday, 13 September 2014 04:43 (1 week ago) Permalink

Not that Egypt's 2 successors to Mubarak have been anything to write home about, but I don't agree with the Commentary writer that Obama should have tried to have done the below

Was there anything he could realistically have done to prevent Hosni Mubarak’s ouster

curmudgeon, Saturday, 13 September 2014 14:03 (1 week ago) Permalink

i don't really feel qualified to play monday night quarterback with regard to obama's middle east policy. bret stephens believes that bush had the answer, which is that the US must project power abroad to maintain global order. we've only ever done this surreptitiously though; the myth of the sovereignty of our client states was never something we abandoned. reagan wasn't open about his involvement in nicaragua. cold war conflicts were justified in national security terms -- communism was framed as an existential threat. what stephens is calling for seems out of line, not with the practice of foreign policy in past administrations but with the theory. it's disingenuous for him to frame obama's relatively hands off policy -- as he understands it -- as a diversion from the mainstream of what presidents have done. i think the real situation here is that there was no clear series of moves that would have prevented the rise of the islamic state that didn't involve US troops staying in iraq.

Treeship, Monday, 15 September 2014 00:36 (6 days ago) Permalink

would be v. happy to never read anyone praise truman or the odious acheson as 'great statesmen' who saved us all from postwar chaos et al ever again.

(The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Monday, 15 September 2014 21:42 (6 days ago) Permalink

you might want to avoid the recent 'the unknown known' film about rumsfeld

Karl Malone, Tuesday, 16 September 2014 04:17 (5 days ago) Permalink

ha -- i'm a fan of morris but couldn't bring myself to spend two hours with rumsfeld.

(The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Tuesday, 16 September 2014 04:24 (5 days ago) Permalink

Does stupid stuff.

son of a lewd monk (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 16 September 2014 23:22 (5 days ago) Permalink

p. zero bama doesn't think it's important to put advocates of monetary stimulus on the Fed board?

http://www.vox.com/2014/9/18/6392635/obama-monetary-policy

reggie (qualmsley), Friday, 19 September 2014 18:39 (2 days ago) Permalink


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.