"What if Obama can't lead?" :o

[B-Man]

The 'leadership' continues....................

 

 

Obama 'hijacks' tech executive meeting to make 'PR pitch' on Obamacare website fix instead of dealing with NSA surveillance

 

By

David Martosko, U.s. Political Editor

 

During a White House meeting called to brief America's largest tech companies today about government overreach in electronic surveillance, President Barack Obama changed the subject – angering some meeting participants by shifting gears to address the failed launch of healthcare.gov.

'That wasn't what we came for,' a vice-president of a company whose CEO attended told MailOnline. 'We really didn't care for a PR pitch about how the administration is trying to salvage its internal health care tech nightmare.'

One executive said that meeting participants were dead-set against straying from the principal focus of the meeting – the uncomfortable and legally untenable position they are in when the National Security Agency demands access to their digital records.

The White House said in advance that the meeting would include a discussion of healthcare.gov, but the company executive said the only subject that mattered to the participants was the NSA.

'He basically hijacked the meeting,' the executive said. 'We all told the White House that we were only there to talk about what the NSA was up to and how it affects us.'

 

Yet Obama, according to insiders, repeatedly peppered the discussion with reassuring words about how the Affordable Care Act's marquee website was well on its way to becoming functional.

 

The change was so noticeable that an AFP/Getty photographer assigned to cover the event noted in a photo caption only that Obama was there to 'meet with executives from leading tech companies to discuss progress with healthcare.gov.'

 

One executive of a company represented at the meeting told The Guardianthat a change of focus 'is not going to happen. We are there to talk about the NSA.'

 

 

The 15 companies, including Google, Yahoo!, Microsoft, Netflix, Twitter, Apple and Etsy, issued a one-line joint statement after the 150-minute marathon meeting in the White House's Roosevelt Room, saying that they 'appreciated the opportunity to share directly with the president our principles on government surveillance that we released last week and we urge him to move aggressively on reform.'

 

There was no mention in the statement of healthcare.gov.

Read more: http://www.dailymail...l#ixzz2nmZkspaD

[4merper4mer]

Or the Cultural Revolution in 1960s Red China. Now THEY knew how to handle dissidents...

 

I think that is just a birthday party at Chinese Applebee's.

[B-Man]

Obama portrayed as victim

 

Take a look at the wording of this WaPo headline:

 

“Obama Suffers Most From Year of Turmoil, Poll Finds.”

 

The article goes on to describe the precipitous decline in Obama’s standing in approval polls:

 

 

His position is all the more striking when compared with his standing a year ago, as he was preparing for his second inauguration after a solid reelection victory. That high note proved fleeting as the president faced a series of setbacks, culminating in the botched rollout of his Affordable Care Act two months ago

.

 

Some may think reporters and editors are simply clumsy or indifferent writers, and sometimes they are. But much of the time they choose their words (and photos) with exquisite and subtle care. They also realize that most people only look at the headlines and photos of most articles, and that those are therefore the most important elements, and that even people who do read the article often read only the first few paragraphs.

 

In thisWaPo article, the headline and photo have been chosen to suggest that Obama is a suffering victim—in fact, the greatest victim—of a series of unfortunate circumstances that have befallen him. He’s nearly a martyr. And the text (the excerpt quoted above is the second paragraph in the piece) reinforces that idea by this phrase, “faced a series of setbacks.” Passive voice; no actor.

 

 

 

Keep reading at link:

 

 

 

 

 

I find the headline there painfully funny: "Obama suffers most from year of turmoil, poll finds." It's always all about Obama! Even the suffering. Poor Obama.

 

What about all the people who are suffering as the malfunctioning Obamacare machine cranks into action? I know, the point is that he's doing the worst in the poll, but phrasing it like that — Obama suffers most — is absurd.

 

And I assume they mean to help Obama, to inspire sympathy for him. It's patronizing to him, and it's unsympathetic to everyone else who is suffering.

Edited December 18, 2013 by B-Man

[OCinBuffalo]

http://www.realclear...xt_messiah.html

 

Hehehehe. In essence Walters says this:

"I wished Obama was going to be good. I didn't think about it, and now I see that I shoud have thought, and not wished".

 

Then, rather than promising to think, and not wish going forward? Nope, in the future:

"But you know? He still has several years to go. What does he have, three years more, Piers? And, you know, there will be a lot of changes, one thinks in that time."

 

Yep, right back to wishing again. "One thinks"? No. "One wishes". "One hopes". The hilarious part is that she used the word "thinks", rather than the others, because? Her cognitive dissonance is showing. http://en.wikipedia....tive_dissonance

 

TakeYouToTasker's CS Lewis quote comes to mind....

 

She knows, deep down, that the thinking needs to start, and the wishing needs to end, but, she behaves: oppositely. That's textbook "cognitive dissonance". Hell, even Tony Robbins knows about this one.

 

And what do you know? One of the responses of those dealing with dissonance? "seeking support from others who share the beliefs". Or, you go on Piers Morgan's show, and, say the quote above.

Edited December 18, 2013 by OCinBuffalo

[B-Man]

 

 

White House Tries to Prevent Judge From Ruling on Surveillance Efforts

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/22/us/white-house-tries-to-prevent-judge-from-ruling-on-surveillance-efforts.html?smid=tw-share&_r=0

 

 

Alternate headline: "White House Tries to Prevent Having a Court Call It ‘Lawless’ for 4th Time in 1 Week" .................lol

 

 

.

[Keukasmallies]

As he sows, so shall he reap, or bu!!**** does not a solid foundation make.

[B-Man]

From HuffPo, The White House's PROBLEM:

 

 

 

 

HEH: What Didn’t the President Know And When Didn’t He Know It?

 

 

 

 

Pajama Boy Nation.

by Victor Davis Hanson

 

FTA:

Pajama Boy is the bookend to vero possumus, the faux-Greek columns, the Obama rainbow logo, cooling the planet and lowering the seas, hope and change, Forward!, “Yes, we can!”, the Nate Silver infatuation, Barbara Walters’ “messiah,” David Brooks’ crease, Chris Matthews’ tingle, and the army of Silicon techies who can mobilize for Obama but not for Obamacare. These are the elites without identities who feed on the latest fad. They are the upper-crust versions of those who once mobbed stores to buy the last Cabbage Patch Kids doll, or had to have a pet rock on their dresser. Obama, after all, was the lava lamp and Chia Pet of the young urban progressive.

 

If I were to focus on just two of the many characteristics of Pajama Boy nation in the Age of Obama, one would be that the consequences of one’s ideology apply always to someone else. Obama obsesses on inequality, but cannot even go through the populist motions of avoiding Martha’s Vineyard, or not dressing like a nerd for golf at the latest tony course.

 

He is an arugula-eating man of the people who tries to bowl only during election season. Michelle rags on the 1%, but still hits Costa del Sol and Aspen. Obamacare for us; for congressional staffers and insiders something quite different. A Nobel Prize and a half a billion dollars for guru Al Gore; and dumping Current TV on a fossil-fuelled, anti-Semitic authoritarian Middle Eastern regime to fund more good work of our green Elmer Gantry. Amnesty for illegal aliens, but private academies for liberal kids far from the ensuing chaos of the public schools. Pajama Boys are fiercely liberal so that they can fiercely avoid the people they so champion and are so afraid to live among.

 

Second, the architects of Pajama Boy nation always expect others to go on despite rather than because of them. The frackers must frack so that Obama can brag about their productivity, while he bites his lip and looks pained to billionaire coastal benefactors about pumping liquid into the bowels of their Mother Earth.

 

On Friday, Barack Obama was back out to again brag about his three supposed accomplishments: One, the deficit is shrinking; two, the gas and oil picture is brightening; and three, we are not witnessing anymore shut-downs of government over the debt ceiling. He should have added — “We do best when no one listens to me.”

 

Savings accrued from the sequester that was forced upon Obama by those Tea Party nuts in the House. Gas prices are dropping despite the efforts of Obama to stop fracking and horizontal drilling on federal lands. Senator Obama himself voted to shut down the government under George W. Bush, rather than to raise the debt ceiling — having once passionately adopted the very stance that he now demonizes others for.

 

 

 

.

[B-Man]

Into Year 6, Obama admits he’s clueless

 

What a depressing presidency Barack Obama has wrought.

 

Waltzing into office five years ago with the media’s shameless aid on a high-school-style campaign pledge of “Hope and Change,” the former community organizer from Chicago spent his last press conference of the year apologizing for everything he’s done wrong — then announcing he’s “eager to skip town” to Hawaii for “a couple days of sleep and sun.” Well, 17, but who’s counting.

 

One truly has to wonder how the vaunted White House staff of advisers and sycophants came up with the battle plan for Friday’s presser, the last of a terrible year: “Hey, what if he goes out, lists all the things he did wrong, apologizes repeatedly, then promises to do better next year? Anyone? OK, how about he goes out and makes a few balloon animals. C’mon, gimme’ some help, people!”

 

 

 

Read more: http://www.washingto.../#ixzz2oP340eyE

 

 

 

 

 

 

The End of Ethics Cynicism reigns in the Age of Obama.

[Keukasmallies]

POTUS does, however, appear to be the front runner in terms of championing the meaningless gesture.

 

http://www.nbcnews.com/health/obama-signs-health-insurance-dc-website-2D11792136

[IDBillzFan]

POTUS does, however, appear to be the front runner in terms of championing the meaningless gesture.

 

http://www.nbcnews.c...site-2D11792136

 

Obama Administration Obamacare Backup Plan: Throw the gun and run like hell.

[B-Man]

 

The Great Race Hoax

 

When Barack Obama rose to national prominence following his 2004 keynote address at the Democratic National Convention, his African-American heritage was a footnote to the fawning reception he received from the media and from most Americans.

 

While the speech was not a case study in brilliant oratory, Illinois State Senator Barack Obama exuded charisma and eloquently discussed an appealing if not particularly original theme of unity and bipartisanship.

 

Fast forward to today. President Obama's race is no longer a footnote. It is central to his presidency. It is arguably his defining characteristic. Unity and bipartisanship are nowhere to be found.

 

Who is responsible for this? The blame rests squarely with the American Left, and specifically, with the racialists.

 

Though it's hard to pinpoint the precise point when President Obama ceased being a post-racial president, I suspect the transition from post-racial to racial accelerated in late spring of 2009, when his approval ratings started to drop from his all-time highs.

 

It was around that time that the far left began to baselessly speculate that maybe it was the president's race that was causing people to lose confidence in him.

 

By the time the tea party became a national movement in the summer of 2009, accusations of racism were rampant. Left-wing activists and the media pointed to a handful of offensive (not even necessary racist, just tasteless or crass) signs out of thousands to dishonestly paint the entire movement as racist.

 

Soon, the racism charge was leveled not just against the decidedly non-racial and non-racist tea party (many of whose leaders are black), but against all of Obama's political enemies.

 

Of the scores of pundits in media who routinely vilify and slander their political opponents as racists, many are either employed by or regularly appear on MSNBC, a non-news network which even the left-wing The New Yorker mocked for its complete lack of balance, refusal to air conservative voices, and unequivocal commitment to Obama and his agenda.

 

{snip}

How do the racialists want history to judge President Obama's term in office? Do they want to see it primarily as an epic collision between progressivism and conservatism or do they want to see it as a collision between an African-American president and the racist ruling elite?

 

Make no mistake about it: the far left intends to write the history of Obama's presidency with the racial theme as the centerpiece. Whether it will work is unknown. One must also differentiate between short-term and long-term history. Historical revisionism that treats the president's race as the dominant aspect of his term might pervade pop-history in the short term, but it might be soundly rejected by historians and popular culture 50-100 years from now.

 

Nevertheless, historical revisionism is the intent of the racialists. If Obamacare collapses in two years, they will point to the president's race. If he leaves office an unpopular president who failed to achieve anything of substance, they will blame race.

 

By legitimizing the race debate, the mainstream media has in effect enabled this forthcoming perversion of history. It will happen. The only question is whether the racial theme will be absorbed into the historical record or whether history will expose it for what it is: the great race hoax.

 

 

 

 

 

Read more: http://www.americant...l#ixzz2omd2rN3a

Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

[3rdnlng]

Obama, finally showing real leadership:

 

http://scrappleface....xecutive-order/

 

Obama Delays Start of 2014 by Executive Order

 

December 31st, 2013 Scott Ott

 

(2013-12-31) — Citing the need to protect Americans from the impact of a sluggish economy, health care disruptions and international crises related to Iran, North Korea, Russia, Syria and elsewhere, the White House announced today that President Obama has delayed the start of 2014 by at least a year.

Obama reportedly signed the executive order in the presidential limo on his way to a golf course in Hawaii, and likened it to “taking a mulligan for 2013,” according to unnamed White House sources.

“Rushing into a new year with the lingering problems from 2013 makes little sense,” said White House press secretary Jay Carney. “By delaying the start of 2014, the president will be able to work with Democrats in Congress to bring closure to several high profile challenges, and to help voters avoid poor choices in November.”

In an official statement, President Obama said, “My decision to delay the new year until the next new year will allow all Americans to start 2014 with a clean slate — from the chief executive on down to the lowest ordinary person.”

Edited December 31, 2013 by 3rdnlng

[DC Tom]

Obama, finally showing real leadership:

 

http://scrappleface....xecutive-order/

 

Obama Delays Start of 2014 by Executive Order

 

December 31st, 2013 Scott Ott

 

(2013-12-31) — Citing the need to protect Americans from the impact of a sluggish economy, health care disruptions and international crises related to Iran, North Korea, Russia, Syria and elsewhere, the White House announced today that President Obama has delayed the start of 2014 by at least a year.

Obama reportedly signed the executive order in the presidential limo on his way to a golf course in Hawaii, and likened it to “taking a mulligan for 2013,” according to unnamed White House sources.

“Rushing into a new year with the lingering problems from 2013 makes little sense,” said White House press secretary Jay Carney. “By delaying the start of 2014, the president will be able to work with Democrats in Congress to bring closure to several high profile challenges, and to help voters avoid poor choices in November.”

In an official statement, President Obama said, “My decision to delay the new year until the next new year will allow all Americans to start 2014 with a clean slate — from the chief executive on down to the lowest ordinary person.”

 

 

And when asked for an opinion, Nancy Pelosi proclaimed that 2013 was wildly successful, and the administration's statement doesn't mean that 2014 will be delayed.

[3rdnlng]

 

And when asked for an opinion, Nancy Pelosi proclaimed that 2013 was wildly successful, and the administration's statement doesn't mean that 2014 will be delayed.

 

If you are not familiar with Scrappleface, you should be. Scott Ott is funnier than The Onion. Happy New Year.

[B-Man]

 

Mr. Obama has plenty of help with 'leading'.............

 

40,000 new laws take effect in 2014

 

(CNN) - It may have been the least productive year for Congress in history, at least in terms of passing laws – fewer than 60 of which made it through the House and Senate and were signed by President Barack Obama.

Across the country, however, state lawmakers were busy getting more than 40,000 bills passed, ones that tackle everything from drones to food stamp benefits.

 

In Illinois for example, teenagers will no longer get to use tanning beds without a doctor's note. If you live in Delaware, visit the shark fin buffet while you can, a new law will make it illegal to own, sale, or distribute the controversial delicacy. And in California, new laws take effect that will let students take part in school sports, or use bathrooms based on their gender identity, regardless of the gender noted in their birth certificates.

 

.

[B-Man]

_{SLOW LEARNERS:}

_{What is it about Obama that makes otherwise intelligent people so dumb?}

_Politico

_{has a headline for the ages up right now: “}

_{Management Experts Knock Obama}

_{.” Management “experts” are just noticing now, after five years, that Obama’s lack of experience is significant. Maybe these “experts” aren’t so expert.}

 

 

_{Maybe those “otherwise intelligent” people aren’t so otherwise intelligent.}

 

 

 

 

 

 

_{CHANGE: Obama To Americans: You Don’t Deserve To Be Free.}

 

_{“President Obama’s Kansas speech is a remarkable document. In calling for more government controls, more taxation, more collectivism, he has two paragraphs that give the show away.”}

 

 

.

Edited January 2, 2014 by B-Man

[3rdnlng]

http://scrappleface.com/2014/01/06/obama-demands-action-on-temperature-inequality/

 

(2013-01-06) — The growing gap between warmest and coldest is “the penultimate defining challenge of our age,” President Obama announced just hours after returning to Washington D.C. following a two-week vacation in Hawaii.

“If Congress will not move to stop temperature inequality,” Obama said, “then I will. Living in one of the more advanced nations in North America, we can’t wait for the end of partisan bickering to pass sensible regulations.”

Moments after stepping off of Marine One at the White House, the president said “there’s no time for delay, because the thermal gap has grown noticeably even in the past couple of days.”

First Lady Michelle Obama, who remained in Hawaii while her husband and daughters returned to the east coast, noted that temperature inequality has impacted average Americans’ relationships, making distant family members grow cold.

While some scientists questioned whether the gap has grown, and whether legislation can do anything about it, the White House said those researchers lack credibility “because they don’t receive federal grants very soon.”

[B-Man]

 

Robert Gates, former defense secretary, offers harsh critique of Obama’s leadership in ‘Duty’

 

By Bob Woodward, Tuesday, January 7, 2:41 PM

 

In a new memoir, former defense secretary Robert Gates unleashes harsh judgments about President Obama’s leadership and his commitment to the Afghanistan war, writing that by early 2010 he had concluded the president “doesn’t believe in his own strategy, and doesn’t consider the war to be his.

 

For him, it’s all about getting out.”

 

Leveling one of the more serious charges that a defense secretary could make against a commander in chief sending forces into combat, Gates asserts that Obama had more than doubts about the course he had charted in Afghanistan. The president was “skeptical if not outright convinced it would fail,” Gates writes in “Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War.”

 

Obama, after months of contentious discussion with Gates and other top advisers, deployed 30,000 more troops in a final push to stabilize Afghanistan before a phased withdrawal beginning in mid-2011. “I never doubted Obama’s support for the troops, only his support for their mission,” Gates writes.

As a candidate, Obama had made plain his opposition to the 2003 Iraq invasion while embracing the Afghanistan war as a necessary response to the 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, requiring even more military resources to succeed. In Gates’s highly emotional account, Obama remains uncomfortable with the inherited wars and distrustful of the military that is providing him options. Their different worldviews produced a rift that, at least for Gates, became personally wounding and impossible to repair.

 

It is rare for a former Cabinet member, let alone a defense secretary occupying a central position in the chain of command, to publish such an antagonistic portrait of a sitting president.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/robert-gates-former-defense-secretary-offers-harsh-critique-of-obamas-leadership-in-duty/2014/01/07/6a6915b2-77cb-11e3-b1c5-739e63e9c9a7_print.html

 

[Koko78]

Robert Gates, former defense secretary, offers harsh critique of Obama’s leadership in ‘Duty’

 

Gates is clearly a racist. Only racist redneck women-hating gun-toting bible-thumping teabaggers disapprove of the Chosen One.

[OCinBuffalo]

Once again we see the same pattern: The far-left doesn't produce leaders. The only thing it produces is people who are good at complaining. Every so often, events, not their skills, allow them to take over, and every time: the same awful results.

 

Leadership requires character, and not just "I don't cheat on my wife" character, but the kind that has dealt with massive adversity and....tied.

 

Yes, that's right. Tied. Real massive adversity means you aren't going to win, and everybody, those on your team, and those that aren't, know it.

 

Leadership, the kind that comes from inherent ability, and experiences, not what is taught in "leadership class" exposes itself here. Can you motivate the team, can you come up with a plan, can you execute...when everyone knows the best thing you can hope for is a tie?

 

Leadership's existence is proven in results, period. For example: What does Gates want out of this conversation? Why would he bother exposing himself to the endless personal attacks that are sure to come from the professional progressive character assassins? He must really think he has something to say on the matter, that matters, for him to go this far. He must think it's important that we know.

 

Spare me the "selling books" routine. The people who were going to buy the Secretary of Defense's book...were going to buy it one way or the other. It's not like the dumb demographic is going to suddenly buy this kind of book, no matter what it says. Even if the "selling books" point is accurate...how many more books does he sell? 5%?

 

No. "Selling books" doesn't work in this situation. We aren't talking about salacious "celebrity" crap. We are talking about the real issues of the day vs. this presidency, which the dumb demographic has no interest in, by definition.

 

These real issues, are where Obama's lack of leadership shows. If Obama was a real leader, Gates has no real reason to expose himself to Media Matters. But, Obama is so bad, that Gates feels a literal "Duty" to say what he has to say, hence the name of the book.

 

Once again the answer is in the results: if Obama did possess real leadership...Gates doesn't make his choice.

 

It's a hell of thing for a lifetime "chain of command" guy to come out and say something like this....and it doesn't happen, unless you feel a duty to do so.