PDA

View Full Version : So, Now The Excuse is....The Job is Too Big For One Person!



soonercruiser
6/18/2012, 02:04 PM
Trust the lefties at the New York Slimes to help make excuses for Obama on why he has such a poor record in office!
THere was just too big a hole to dig out of; there is just too much about the economy that is dependant on other nations; there is just too much uncertaintly in the Middle East; the job is just to big & hard for one man!

Anybody old enough to remember this approach defending Jimmy Carter?
Yes! This is what the left said about Jimmy Carter too!
And, they are correct! The job of President is too big for one liberal who tries to micromanage the U.S. economy!

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/18/world/obama-re-election-complicated-by-world-events.html?_r=1&hp

Excerpts follow.....


In a World of Complications, Obama Faces a Re-election Test
By PETER BAKER

WASHINGTON — For Barack Obama, a president who set out to restore good relations with the world in his first term, the world does not seem to be cooperating all that much with his bid to win a second.

That reality has been on vivid display in recent days. Europe has seemed unable to contain its rolling economic crisis to just Greece. The Syrian conflict has intensified as the United Nations suspended its observers’ mission amid the violence. Egypt’s popular revolution is at risk of being reversed by the military. And the Russians are cracking down at home and rattling sabers abroad.

As President Obama left on Sunday for an international summit meeting in Mexico, the daunting array of overseas issues underscored the challenges for an incumbent who is trying to manage global affairs while arguing a case for re-election. Although American voters are not particularly focused on foreign policy in a time of economic trouble, the rest of the world has a way of occupying a president’s time and intruding on his best-laid campaign plans.

If anything, the dire headlines from around the world only reinforce an uncomfortable reality for this president and any of his successors: even the world’s last superpower has only so much control over events beyond its borders, and its own course can be dramatically affected in some cases. Whether from ripples of the European fiscal crisis or flare-ups of violence in Baghdad, it is easy to be whipsawed by events......
.....

Some Romney advisers said Mr. Obama was too willing to avoid accountability by presenting himself as a powerless bystander.

“I’ve still got my day job,” says President Obama, who met with leaders of the euro zone at Camp David, Md., last month.




“Both candidates have to pretend that the U.S. presidency is far more influential over events than it really is,” said Stephen D. Biddle, a scholar at the Council on Foreign Relations. The obvious example is the European economic situation, which has profound implications for the American economy but is largely out of American hands.

“But to admit this is to look weak or to seem to evade responsibility,” Mr. Biddle said. “So both candidates tacitly agree to pretend that their policies are capable of righting the American economy while their opponent’s would sink it, when the reality is that both are in thrall to foreigners’ choices to a degree that neither would acknowledge.”

The president will talk with European leaders about pulling out of the financial spiral after Sunday’s election in Greece, which gave the pro-bailout party a slim victory and the right to form a coalition government. He will also meet with President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia just days after the Obama administration accused Moscow of supplying arms to Syria in its bloody crackdown on the uprising there.

Yet Mr. Romney has occasionally turned to foreign policy to bolster his broader attempt to portray Mr. Obama as a failed president. On Saturday, he told a conservative coalition that when it came to Israel, he would “just look at the things the president has done and do the opposite.” On the CBS News program “Face the Nation” on Sunday, Mr. Romney said that on Iran “I would be willing to take military action, if necessary, to prevent them from becoming a nuclear threat to the world.”

Some Romney advisers said Mr. Obama was too willing to avoid accountability by presenting himself as a powerless bystander.

“These crises reflect an absence of leadership from the Obama administration,” said Kristen Silverberg, a former State Department official under President George W. Bush who is advising Mr. Romney. “He sat out the Iran protests, has faltered on Syria and let the Russians know he’ll be even more ‘flexible’ after our election. Global security and the strength of the global economy depend on strong U.S. leadership and a president who believes in America’s role in the world.”

Jamie M. Fly, executive director of the Foreign Policy Initiative, a conservative group, said there was a growing sense “that what is required is American leadership rather than the president’s leading-from-behind foreign policy that has failed to address an imploding Syria, a nuclearizing Iran, an economic crisis in Europe and a revanchist Russia.”

He is the “first real national security Democrat” since President John F. Kennedy, said James M. Goldgeier, dean of American University’s School of International Service. “He looks and acts like a commander in chief. So yes, the euro crisis, Syria, Iran, etc., can cause him problems. But Romney has his work cut out for him on foreign policy.”

But for all the attention on Syria, Egypt and other areas of conflict, the most important crisis for Mr. Obama remains the European economy because of its impact at home. “Europe’s weakness is likely to blow back on Obama’s efforts this fall — just at the wrong time,” she said. “He’ll have to run harder because of it.”

Midtowner
6/18/2012, 02:17 PM
You do realize that editorials are not representative of the paper, correct?

sappstuf
6/18/2012, 02:27 PM
You do realize that editorials are not representative of the paper, correct?

Try harder..


A version of this news analysis appeared in print on June 18, 2012, on page A1 of the New York edition with the headline: In a World of Complications, Obama Faces a Re-election Test..

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/18/world/obama-re-election-complicated-by-world-events.html?_r=1&hp

badger
6/18/2012, 02:32 PM
You do realize that editorials are not representative of the paper, correct?

I consider everything that a paper runs to be a reflection of the paper that runs it (but to a significantly less degree if it's syndication). Employees are representatives of the businesses they work for. This does not appear to be syndicated, so yeah, I consider this a reflection of the NY Times because the NY Times ran it!

As for the challenges of re-election, here's my two cents: Americans like status quo. Maybe not in all things, but for the most part, routine and structure makes people feel healthy, happy and secure.

Thus, President Obama will REALLY have to eff up to not be re-elected. Much like I didn't see Wisconsin recalling Gov. Scott Walker, I don't see America "recalling" (aka not re-electing) President Obama.

Employment levels might be unfavorably low, but it's not shocking low.

Wealth might be shrinking some, but it's not shrinking to the point of panic.

Jobs might be scarce, but enough people have some form of employment that people aren't going to freak out every time the jobs report says that the country only added a few thousand jobs instead of tens of thousands.

So, Obama will get re-elected. Even if the job is too big for one person, heh.

badger
6/18/2012, 02:53 PM
I hope not.

While I'm a Republican, I am not sure what Mitt's intentions are, because I really have no idea where he stands on many issues and about all we hear about him is OMG MORMON OMG.

So, it might not be a totally bad thing if Republicans continue to gain majorities in the House and Senate but the White House stays blue. When everyone was blue, we had Obamacare shoved down our throats. So, the federal leadership divided might not be such a terrible thing.

Who will I vote for? Doesn't matter -- I live in Oklahoma, which is as red as its Native American name implies :D

diverdog
6/18/2012, 02:58 PM
Trust the lefties at the New York Slimes to help make excuses for Obama on why he has such a poor record in office!
THere was just too big a hole to dig out of; there is just too much about the economy that is dependant on other nations; there is just too much uncertaintly in the Middle East; the job is just to big & hard for one man!

Anybody old enough to remember this approach defending Jimmy Carter?
Yes! This is what the left said about Jimmy Carter too!
And, they are correct! The job of President is too big for one liberal who tries to micromanage the U.S. economy!

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/18/world/obama-re-election-complicated-by-world-events.html?_r=1&hp

Excerpts follow.....

Good lord you are really off the deep end if you came to those conclusions after reading that article. I guess the do not teach econ 101 in the military.

rock on sooner
6/18/2012, 03:40 PM
While I'm a Republican, I am not sure what Mitt's intentions are, because I really have no idea where he stands on many issues and about all we hear about him is OMG MORMON OMG.

So, it might not be a totally bad thing if Republicans continue to gain majorities in the House and Senate but the White House stays blue. When everyone was blue, we had Obamacare shoved down our throats. So, the federal leadership divided might not be such a terrible thing.

Who will I vote for? Doesn't matter -- I live in Oklahoma, which is as red as its Native American name implies :D

Hey, Badj, I don't think anybody, except Mitt, knows his intentions..and that changes
frequently, depending on who he's talking to/with/about! To your point about divided
government, I think it's a good thing and always have, believing that intelligent humans
can find common ground on most issues. Much to my chagrin,intelligent humans seem
to not exist in our nation's political arena. So many of those there now function as "it's
my way or not at all." Ain't no way to run anything, much less, government.

KantoSooner
6/18/2012, 03:53 PM
This argument has been trotted out many times before and is, on it's face, rather unremarkable. Of course the Presidency is waaaaaaaay beyond one person's abilities. It's beyond his abilities even if he maintains an imperial court with advisors out the butt and a staff of thousands.

But only if you define a President's responsibilities as controlling every aspect of life, big or small. And that's what makes The Times' opinion piece idiotic on its face.

This article is an excellent example of the poor state of teaching of civics in our schools today. The President is the Executive in Chief. He does not directly propose or diagram legislation. That is the job of Congress. He does not control the budget, that, too, is Congress' job. He does not, BY DESIGN do all manner of things.

And yet we seem to blame him if gas goes up a nickel. Or if our firefighters use biased tests. Or if we feel peeved about environmental policies.

Good Lord, grow up America! Neither George Bush NOR Barack Obama had/have all that much influence over the economy. That's a naughty little secret. Presidents will ride that puppy if things are good. But they really can't do much to effect the economy while they are in office. Too big a ship to turn around that quickly.

The job is probably the hardest one in the world....but is in no way beyond the abilities of one man, presuming we don't expect him or her to keep the ants away from our picnics, prevent it from raining on the fourth of July and make everyone play nice at recess.

TheHumanAlphabet
6/18/2012, 04:46 PM
I no longer subscribe to the timid and bewildered statements of leftists and progressives. They know exactly what they are doing and are constantly trying to hide the truth and their agenda from Americans.

cleller
6/19/2012, 08:27 AM
Doesn't it take a village?

badger
6/19/2012, 08:57 AM
Doesn't it take a village?

It takes a village to produce a village idiot :P

Tulsa_Fireman
6/19/2012, 10:34 AM
Just keep afloat, Deutschland. And let the euro weaken quite a bit between now and the next 15 years. And while you're at it, depress housing prices a little, too. I need to spend my retirement savings on a cute little timber-frame in the Mosel valley.

soonercruiser
6/19/2012, 09:21 PM
Good lord you are really off the deep end if you came to those conclusions after reading that article. I guess the do not teach econ 101 in the military.

Sorry that my post was a liitle too big for you to grasp Diver!

MSNBS and some other news outlet "talking heads" have been making those exact excuses that I listed.
The story was a print illustration of this being their latest strategy to save the dictator.

soonercruiser
6/19/2012, 09:22 PM
It takes a village to produce a village idiot :P

:watermelon:

diverdog
6/19/2012, 11:40 PM
Sorry that my post was a liitle too big for you to grasp Diver!

MSNBS and some other news outlet "talking heads" have been making those exact excuses that I listed.
The story was a print illustration of this being their latest strategy to save the dictator.

Ah no. It is another illustration of you not know what the f**k you are talking about when it comes to economics.

soonercruiser
6/20/2012, 10:06 PM
You are delusional Diver!
I have seen video clips of that exactly happening on the liberal news outlets!
Go back to following the other LW lemmings over the cliff.
Duh!

diverdog
6/20/2012, 11:19 PM
You are delusional Diver!
I have seen video clips of that exactly happening on the liberal news outlets!
Go back to following the other LW lemmings over the cliff.
Duh!

Show me anywhere in your article where it says the job is to big for one man? Also show me one economist......just one Cruiser that says the fiscal crisis in Europe will not hurt the US.