Author Topic: Obama's Leadership  (Read 66077 times)

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Obama's Leadership
« Reply #175 on: August 19, 2014, 10:42:17 AM »
Its amazing to me how Obama is frittering away his presidency on such bs

Agree.  What's also bad is his supporters don't care that he has checked out.

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Obama's Leadership
« Reply #176 on: August 26, 2014, 11:19:19 AM »
Quote
6 Funerals Obama Cared Less About Than Michael Brown


 
by Ben Shapiro  25 Aug 2014 864  post a comment 


On Monday, the funeral of 18-year-old Michael Brown, who was shot under disputed circumstances by Officer Darren Wilson, took place. Slated attendees included Snoop Dogg, Governor Jay Nixon (D-MO), Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO), P. Diddy, Spike Lee, Jesse Jackson, and giving the eulogy, Al Sharpton.



The White House has also sent three aides to the funeral: Broderick Johnson of My Brother’s Keeper Task Force; Marlon Marshall, deputy director of the White House Office of Public Engagement; and Heather Foster, adviser for the Office of Public Engagement.



Which begs the question: why would the Obama administration send not one but three attendees to the funeral of a strong-arm robbery suspect who allegedly punched a police officer in the face – but ignore the funerals of other, more worthy characters?



Here are six people whose funerals the Obama administration took less seriously than Brown’s.



Margaret Thatcher. No senior White House officials were sent to the funeral of our staunchest Cold War ally, former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. Instead, President Obama sent the charge d’affaires at the US embassy in London, and the former ambassador to Britain, as well as former Secretaries of State George Shultz and James Baker. That drew the ire of the British press, with the UK Sun reporting, “A No 10 source said last night: ‘We are a little surprised by the White House’s reaction as we were expecting a high-profile attendance.” The Guardian said that the White House sent “distinctly low-key official representation.”



Chris Kyle. When the famed sniper was murdered at a Texas shooting range in February 2013, not only did the White House make no statement, the White House sent nobody to his funeral. And while the White House did issue a statement about the death of singer Whitney Housing (she died that same month), the White House never even mentioned Kyle.



Nicholas Oresko, The Medal of Honor recipient for heroism during World War II died at age 96 last year. President Harry Truman gave him the Medal of Honor after he wiped out two enemy bunkers during the Battle of the Bulge despite being gravely wounded. There was no reported White House attendance at his funeral.



Lech Kaczynski. The Polish president was killed in a plane crash in 2010. President Obama originally announced he would attend the funeral, but cancelled, then golfed the day of his funeral.



Aunt Zeituni. Obama’s aunt, Zeituni Onyango, played a large role in his autobiography, Dreams From My Father. Obama called her “Auntie.” She died in South Boston in April 2013. As The New York Times reported, “Mr. Obama helped pay funeral expenses and sent a condolence note, Ms. Onyango’s family members said, but the president did not attend, as he was golfing.”



James Foley. Foley’s funeral is not scheduled until October 18. On Sunday, however, his family held a memorial service for the journalist beheaded at the hands of ISIS. The service, in New Hampshire, drew hundreds, including Senators Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) and Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), as well as Governor Maggie Hassan.. There were no reports of representatives from the White House at the event.



President Obama’s delegation to Michael Brown’s funeral sends an important message. That message isn’t lost on the families of the soldiers and cops, teachers and firefighters, citizens who aren’t killed under disputed circumstances, don’t become the subject of riots, and who therefore don’t receive presidential aides at their funerals.



Ben Shapiro is Senior Editor-At-Large of Breitbart News and author of the new book, The People vs. Barack Obama: The Criminal Case Against The Obama Administration (Threshold Editions, June 10, 2014). He is also Editor-in-Chief of TruthRevolt.org. Follow Ben Shapiro on Twitter @benshapiro.


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39387
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama's Leadership
« Reply #177 on: August 29, 2014, 03:29:51 PM »

Obama’s failure of leadership summed up in three simple standards


Friday, Aug 29, 2014 at 12:34 PM EDT


 


 


 

In the wake of President Obama’s admission that the United States doesn’t have a strategy yet when it comes to dealing with ISIS in Syria, it is a good opportunity to look at the President’s leadership style. On radio this morning, KFMB’s Mike Slater filled in for Glenn and looked at a few of former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s leadership standards in relation to Obama’s habits.
 
Your browser does not support iframes.
Get Glenn Live! On TheBlaze TV
 
Since the declaration of the caliphate, many have pointed to Obama’s comments in a January 2014 New Yorker article in which he referred to ISIS as a “jayvee team,” but there was another quote in that article that Mike was struck by that speaks to his opinion of leadership.

“One of the things that I’ve learned to appreciate more as president is you are essentially a relay swimmer in a river full of rapids, and that river is history,” Obama said. “You don’t start with a clean slate, and the things you start may not come to full fruition on your timetable.”

“Right there, ladies and gentlemen is the president not only looking but begging for someone to blame,” Mike said. “He’s merely a relay swimmer in a river full of rapids. How dare you be critical of him for not having a plan with ISIS. He’s been pretty busy these past few weeks with his tee times. Rudy [Giuliani] has a few standards for leadership. I want to run by a few of them and ask you if the President follows these rules or not.”

Rule 1: First things first

“Honest question. Has anything in these last six years, has anything been dealt with at all – let alone first things first? There’s a new PR strategy in the White House. It’s very simple: Wait. The old PR strategy used to be: Try to get in front of things and spin it. Now it is just wait.

Think about it. Has anything in the last six years been resolved? Go right down the line. Fast and Furious. The VA. Anything really resolved? Anything changed… The news cycle moves so fast, they wait a day or two. It blows over.

Let me ask you this one: The southern border. It was only a few weeks ago when that was the biggest news story of the year, right? And now that we are not paying attention to it, now that we have been distracted by something else, you think the immigrants have suddenly stopped flooding across our border… No. That’s all still happening… but the White House has successfully waited it out.


Advertisement

Our national attention span, it’s like that of a gnat. So far, from Rudy’s rule of ‘first things first,’ this president’s rule is nothing ever.”

Rule 2: Promise little and deliver much

“It’s a great standard… We were just talking about our foreign policy. The president… just the other day said ISIS is a cancer. How can you say it’s a cancer that needs to be removed, then say you don’t have a strategy? He’s making this up. Yeah, this red line, that red line, but there’s no delivery. That makes us a laughing stock. That makes us a paper tiger. It’s far from promise little and deliver much. It’s quite to the opposite with this president.”

Rule 3: Everyone is accountable

“This one is my favorite. Rudy tells the story of his first day as mayor of New York City. He walks into his beautiful new office building… you can just imagine how grand this office would be. And Rudy walks in and looks out his window onto the streets of New York City, takes a deep breath, as he begins his first tenure as mayor. He sits down at his desk and he sees something on the end of it. He calls his secretary [in] and says, ‘Ma’am, What’s this?’ ‘Oh, that’s your name plate, sir, Mayor Rudolph Giuliani.’ ‘No, no. That’s not right.’ ‘What do you mean? That’s your name. This is your office.’ He says, ‘I know, but I want my name plate here on my desk to read something different.’

So they changed it. And throughout his tenure as mayor, Rudy’s nameplate on his desk read: ‘I am responsible.

That is leadership. Rudy’s third principle: Everyone is accountable all the time. But our president today, he’s just a relay swimmer in a river of rapids. Wow.”

Front page image courtesy of the AP

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39387
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama's Leadership
« Reply #178 on: August 30, 2014, 03:18:13 AM »
Breibart - Big Government ^ | 8-29-2014 | Jonathan Strong
Posted on August 29, 2014 at 11:25:42 PM EDT by Sir Napsalot

At a Democratic National Committee fundraiser in New York Friday, President Obama attributed people's pervasive sense the world is falling apart to “social media.”

“The world’s always been messy… we’re just noticing now in part because of social media,” Obama said.

.....

“If you watch the nightly news, it feels like the world is falling apart,” Obama said. He said this is a time of extraordinary changes around the world.

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Obama's Leadership
« Reply #179 on: September 05, 2014, 12:19:37 PM »

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Obama's Leadership
« Reply #180 on: September 12, 2014, 11:24:00 AM »
A liberal saying Obama is on the verge of doing Jimmy Carter-like damage to Democrats on foreign policy. 


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39387
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama's Leadership
« Reply #181 on: September 12, 2014, 11:29:13 AM »
 :D

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Obama's Leadership
« Reply #182 on: September 25, 2014, 05:25:53 PM »
Is this good leadership?

Obama’s UN Speech Praises Muslim Cleric Who Reportedly Backed 2004 Fatwa on U.S. Soldiers
BY
FOX NEWS INSIDER
 // SEP 24 2014 // 10:12PM AS SEEN ON
THE KELLY FILE

In his U.N. speech today, President Barack Obama appeared to praise a controversial Muslim cleric, Sheikh Abdallah Bin Bayyah. He called the cleric a moderate Muslim leader who could help combat ISIS.

However the cleric’s group backed a fatwa, calling for the deaths of American soldiers in 2004.

Still, the administration says he is not radical because in March 2013, he was at the center of a group of 200 Muslim scholars who met at a forum for promoting peace.

Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, American Islamic Forum for Democracy, was on “The Kelly File” tonight where he said that clever groups condemn the means of groups like ISIS, but they still believe in the same end – supremacism of the Islamic state.

“The narrative in this administration is against the moderates, and it’s actually promoting the status quo,” he said.

Megyn Kelly noted that at the very minimum, Bin Bayyah is controversial and said she doesn’t know why Obama promoted him.

Meanwhile, the White House stands by the president’s statements.

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2014/09/24/obama’s-un-speech-praises-muslim-cleric-who-reportedly-backed-2004-fatwa-us-soldiers

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Obama's Leadership
« Reply #183 on: September 29, 2014, 03:33:55 PM »
His inability to admit mistakes is one of the primary reasons I didn't vote for him 2008.

“This was the ‘dog ate my homework speech’,” Senator John McCain, the former Republican presidential candidate who has long called for Mr Obama to arm moderate rebel forces in Syria, told Fox News, adding that Mr Obama should follow other presidents and admit his mistake.

“Every president in history had made a mistake, acknowledged it and then moved on. President Reagan with Iran contra, President Clinton in Bosnia, President George W Bush after the debacle in Iraq, when he started the surge - but it doesn’t seem to be in this president’s DNA,” he said.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/11129473/Fury-as-Obama-blames-intelligence-agencies-for-Isil-surprise.html

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39387
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama's Leadership
« Reply #184 on: October 01, 2014, 05:40:48 AM »
Unamed Pentagon Official: The President is lying to America
The Daily Caller ^  | 10-1-14 | "Joseph Miller"

Posted on ‎10‎/‎1‎/‎2014‎ ‎8‎:‎27‎:‎03‎ ‎AM by afraidfortherepublic

Joseph Miller is the pen name for a ranking Department of Defense official with a background in U.S. special operations and combat experience in Iraq and Afghanistan. He has worked in strategic planning.

President Barack Obama has taken a lot of flack since his Sunday night “60 Minutes” interview, in which he blamed the intelligence community for his failure to tackle the threat posed by the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. And that is right and proper. Because not only was his excuse of blaming us a lie, but when questioned on his lie, White House press secretary Josh Earnest doubled down with a whole new lie — both of which are easily, publicly proven false.

On Sunday, Obama said the intelligence community had underestimated the rise of ISIS, saying in an interview with CBS, “Our head of the intelligence community, Jim Clapper, has acknowledged that, I think, they underestimated what had been taking place in Syria.”

But we know that isn’t true, as nearly a dozen administration officials have testified to the threat posed by ISIS publicly over the last year.

The fact that the president chose to use the word “they” instead of “we” immediately drew condemnation from friend and foe alike, who saw it as the president’s attempt to pass the buck. (RELATED: Obama Has Spent More Time Playing Golf Than In Intel Briefings)

To mitigate the fallout, Earnest’s office issued a statement stating that, “…A lot of that [decision-making] was predicated on the will of the Iraqi security forces to fight for their country.”

But this was also not true.

In 2010, General Lloyd Austin, then-commander of United State Forces in Iraq, directly informed the president that over 20,000 U.S. troops would be required to maintain the gains made by U.S. forces against al-Qaida and its affiliates, and to mentor the fledgling Iraqi security forces– because he knew they were not ready to go out on their own. (MILLER: The Facts Are In, And Obama’s Policy Is A Direct Danger To The United States)

But in order for Austin’s plan to work, the United States would have to negotiate and sign a security agreement with the government of Iraq to give the U.S. legal authority to keep U.S. military forces in that country beyond December 2010. The White House claims they were forced to withdraw because then-Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki refused to grant U.S. force serving in Iraq post 2010 immunity from Iraqi prosecution– a prerequisite for the presence of U.S. forces anywhere else in the world. But the administration made no attempt to seriously negotiate an agreement with the Iraqis, and cited our withdrawal from Iraq as a major achievement during the 2012 elections, giving the American intelligence community the distinct feeling that the move was politically motivated. (MILLER: Obama’s Current Strategy Is Doomed To Fail)

Instead of investing any time in negotiating the agreement, the Obama administration used the Maliki regimes refusal to grant immunity as a political out for withdrawing all U.S. combat forces from Iraq by the end of 2010. That saw the immediate withdrawal of U.S. forces and the end of Operation New Dawn, the successor to Operation Iraqi Freedom. It also saw the rise of ISIS, and brings us to where we are today. (MILLER: What It Will Take To Win The War Against The Islamic State)

Today, Gen. Lloyd Austin is in command of U.S. Central Command– the U.S. combatant command in charge of fighting all wars in the Middle East, Central Asia and parts of North and East Africa. From that post, he once again recommended to the president that ground forces would be required in order to achieve the White House’s goals, this time against ISIS in Syria and Iraq. (MILLER: Iraq A Symptom Of Larger Obama Failure — Syria)

Once again, the president overruled his commanding general and has chosen to use air strikes alone to “destroy” a terrorist army of 30,000.

The president clearly does not think the mission is worth the cost necessary to complete it; but by pursuing his ends without authorizing the necessary means, he is dooming that mission to failure. (MILLER: Special Forces, Not #Hashtags, Mr. President.

The United States military and intelligence community have learned a lot over the past decade of conflict. Our commander in chief, unfortunately, has not. Since the start of his administration, President Barack Obama has ignored his generals and the intelligence community. Over the past few weeks, he has half-heartedly pursued a strategy that destines us to fail in our mission, and over the past three days, he and his White House have lied to prove otherwise. To those who wear our nation’s uniform, or serve in her intelligence community, that’s insult — and injury.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39387
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Obama's Leadership
« Reply #186 on: October 13, 2014, 07:43:38 PM »


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39387
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama's Leadership
« Reply #188 on: October 15, 2014, 08:41:57 AM »
Clueless in the White House
Townhall.com ^  | October 15, 2014 | Donald Lambro

Posted on ‎10‎/‎15‎/‎2014‎ ‎11‎:‎31‎:‎59‎ ‎AM by Kaslin



Former governor and 2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney tells an Obama joke that is drawing roars of laughter from GOP audiences.

Romney's story, which nails the president's weakness, involves golf champion Phil Mickelson and the grand slam tennis great Andre Agassi. As he tells it, Obama goes to a bank to cash a check, but without any ID on him.

The teller says he can't cash it without identification, pointing out that Mickelson proved who he was by tapping a golf ball into a cup, and Agassi did it by belting a tennis ball into a tiny target. "Is there anything you can do to prove to us who you are?" the bank clerk asked the president.

Obama replies, "I don't have a clue."

That certainly sums up Obama and his job-challenged, trouble-filled presidency: A long-suffering economy, a slew of scandal-ridden programs, agencies and departments, and a series of bungled foreign policies that have resulted in a more powerful and far more lethal terrorist threat that is now on the brink of toppling regimes in the Middle East.

In his first term, Obama was able to con a lot of people, including the gullible liberal news media who adored him. But that no longer appears to be the case as his troubles have mounted and his job approval polls have plummeted.

Gone are the worshipful stories about hope and change. Now he is being sharply criticized for his many failures, by the media and by former administration officials in tell-all books that give him failing grades as commander in chief.

The latest example came Sunday in a blistering review of his presidency in the Washington Post, one of Obama's earliest supporters and defenders. The story was no doubt read by the administration's top echelon and very likely by the president himself and his West Wing staff.

It was written by Aaron David Miller, a distinguished presidential analyst at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. And it ran under the pull-no-punches headline "Disappointer in chief," followed by this sub-head: "Why Obama hasn't become the change we were waiting for."

"Whatever your judgement of Obama's policies, there is a vast gap between the expectations he set for himself and his supporters and the realities of his presidency. Obama reached for greatness but has disappointed many of those who voted for him once or even twice," Miller writes.

Obama ran on a promise to change the way Washington works, but by and large has been hopelessly outmatched in the rough and tumble of governing, a victim not only of his complete lack of hands-on, executive experience, but also of failed policies drawn from the New Deal that didn't work then and wouldn't work now.

"From pledging an Earth-moving transformation, Obama has been reduced to hitting singles…. After drawing early comparisons to Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt and John F. Kennedy all rolled into one, Obama has fallen so low that journalists wonder whether Jimmy Carter is not a more appropriate parallel," Miller says.

"Obama cannot claim the persona of Kennedy, who captured the nation's imagination; nor the mantle of Ronald Reagan, who as Obama himself has admitted, changed the trajectory of the country," he adds.

Obama came from a failed urban political environment that is addicted to higher taxes, big government and other far left, job killing policies that have ruled his presidency. He admired JFK and Reagan for their success in office but didn't understand or acknowledge the economic policies that brought this about.

He has demagogued for higher tax rates, conveniently ignoring Kennedy's across the board tax cuts that got the economy moving again and resulted in a budget surplus.

He signed a higher capital gains tax on investments that hurt the economy and undermined job creation, ignoring the GOP-passed, cap-gains tax cut Bill Clinton signed in his second term that sent the economy soaring and drove unemployment down to 4 percent.

Incredibly, Obama ignored the bi-partisan tax reforms of his own "Fiscal Responsibility and Reform" commission that he created on Feb. 18, 2010.

Democratic adviser Erskine Bowles and Republican Alan Simpson, who co-chaired the commission, proposed a sweeping agenda to cleanse the tax code of exemptions and other special interest tax loopholes.

In order to keep the reforms revenue neutral, they called for lowering the corporate tax rate and other taxes to boost economic growth and create more jobs which would bring more revenue into the Treasury and reduce the deficits.

Obama gave their idea the cold shoulder and an early burial, despite the fact that Bill Clinton recently called for immediately cutting the 35 percent federal corporate tax rate, the highest in the industrial world.

If Obama really admires Ronald Reagan for changing the political trajectory of the country, he would have done well to emulate the Great Communicator who ran on tax reform in his campaign for a second term.

Not only did Reagan carry 49 states, after his earlier tax cuts ended the recession in two years, he won bipartisan support in Congress for tax reforms that cut the top tax rate to 28 percent.

Among its Democratic supporters back then: Rep. Dick Gephardt of Missouri and Sen. Bill Bradley of New Jersey.

But Reagan did what Obama seems incapable of doing: Reaching out across the aisle, bringing his adversaries in for the sales pitch and taking his case to the people to put political pressure on Congress.

He often invited House Speaker Tip O'Neill to the Oval Office where they swapped old Irish jokes and Reagan, in the end, got what he wanted.

Obama, aloof, disengaged and utterly incapable of such hands on governing, is ideologically against the kinds of pro-growth reforms that have drawn bipartisan support in Congress before.

His failures have little or nothing to do with partisanship in a divided Congress. They are the result of his refusal to accept reforms that have not only worked in the past, but were proposed or embraced by presidents in his very own party.

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Obama's Leadership
« Reply #189 on: October 15, 2014, 02:49:01 PM »
Quote
http://www.businessinsider.com/t-boone-pickens-says-obama-is-the-worst-2014-10


We asked billionaire energy tycoon T. Boone Pickens on Friday what worries him the most about America.

"Lack of leadership," he said.

"We have the worst president we ever had," Pickens said.

"I mean, he's going to be determined the worst before he ever gets out of office. He accomplished a lot in less than eight years. Nobody else has ever done that. You know, Jimmy Carter loves him because he was the worst until he showed up, Obama. The Democrats ought to scratch their head on the deal. They ought to screen their prospects or candidates better."

Pickens, 86, also ripped into Obama for his workout routine calling it "pitiful."


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/t-boone-pickens-says-obama-is-the-worst-2014-10#ixzz3G2hWvH8D


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39387
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama's Leadership
« Reply #190 on: October 15, 2014, 02:55:18 PM »

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Obama's Leadership
« Reply #191 on: October 15, 2014, 03:15:27 PM »
http://conservativetribune.com/obama-is-caught-in-lie/

I've been very critical of his claim that he ended the war, when all that happened was he failed to negotiate a new SOFA, and is now claiming we were forced to leave.  Yes, we were forced to leave because of his leadership failure.  No, he didn't "end the war" in Iraq.  Amazing and disappointing amount of dishonesty from our leader.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39387
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama's Leadership
« Reply #192 on: October 19, 2014, 06:39:12 PM »
Free Republic
Browse · Search   Pings · Mail   News/Activism
Topics · Post Article
Skip to comments.

Obama Sees an Iran Deal That Could Avoid Congress
NY Times ^
Posted on October 19, 2014 9:29:42 PM EDT by Perdogg

No one knows if the Obama administration will manage in the next five weeks to strike what many in the White House consider the most important foreign policy deal of his presidency: an accord with Iran that would forestall its ability to make a nuclear weapon. But the White House has made one significant decision: If agreement is reached, President Obama will do everything in his power to avoid letting Congress vote on it.

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Obama's Leadership
« Reply #193 on: October 24, 2014, 12:18:12 PM »
Dang.   :-[

Top Iranian Official: Obama is ‘The Weakest of U.S. Presidents’
Adviser to Iranian president mocks Obama’s ‘humiliating’ presidency (UPDATED)
BY: Adam Kredo    
October 23, 2014

The Iranian president’s senior advisor has called President Barack Obama “the weakest of U.S. presidents” and described the U.S. leader’s tenure in office as “humiliating,” according to a translation of the highly candid comments provided to the Free Beacon.

The comments by Ali Younesi, senior advisor to Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, come as Iran continues to buck U.S. attempts to woo it into the international coalition currently battling the Islamic State (IS, ISIL, or ISIS).

And with the deadline quickly approaching on talks between the U.S. and Iran over its contested nuclear program, Younesi’s denigrating views of Obama could be a sign that the regime in Tehran has no intent of conceding to America’s demands.

“Obama is the weakest of U.S. presidents, he had humiliating defeats in the region. Under him the Islamic awakening happened,” Younesi said in a Farsi language interview with Iran’s semi-official Fars News Agency.

“Americans witnessed their greatest defeats in Obama’s era: Terrorism expanded, [the] U.S. had huge defeats under Obama [and] that is why they want to compromise with Iran,” Younesi said.

The criticism of Obama echoes comments made recently by other world leaders and even former members of the president’s own staff, such as Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

Younesi, a former minister of intelligence in the country, also had some harsh comments about U.S. conservatives and the state of Israel.

“Conservatives are war mongers, they cannot tolerate powers like Iran,” he said. “If conservatives were in power they would go to war with us because they follow Israel and they want to portray Iran as the main threat and not ISIS.”

Younesi took a more conciliatory view towards U.S. Democrats, who he praised for viewing Iran as “no threat.”

“We [the Islamic Republic] have to use this opportunity [of Democrats being in power in the U.S.], because if this opportunity is lost, in future we may not have such an opportunity again,” Younesi said.

The candid comments by Rouhani’s right-hand-man could provide a window into the regime’s mindset as nuclear talks wind to a close.

The Obama administration has maintained for months that it will not permit Congress to have final say over the deal, which many worry will permit Iran to continue enriching uranium, the key component in a nuclear weapon.

About the potential for a nuclear deal, Youseni said, “I am not optimistic so much, but the two sides are willing to reach results,” according to an official translation posted online by Fars News.

Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have adopted a much more pessimistic view of Iran’s negotiating tactics, which many on the Hill maintain are meant to stall for time as Tehran completes its nuclear weapon.

Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R., Fla.), for instance, wrote a letter to the White House this week to tell Obama his desire to skirt Congress is unacceptable.

“Congress cannot and will not sit idly by if the Administration intends on taking unilateral action to provide sanctions relief to Iran for a nuclear deal we perceive to be weak and dangerous for our national security, the security of the region, and poses a threat to the U.S. and our ally, the democratic Jewish State of Israel,” Ros-Lehtinen wrote.

“If the Administration opts to act in a manner that directly contradicts Congress’ intent, then Congress must take all necessary measures to either reverse the executive, unilateral action, or to strengthen and enhance current sanctions law,” she told the president.

“President Obama does believe that by rewarding Iran and permitting it to do whatever it wants in the region, the mullahs in Tehran will be convinced to compromise,” said Saeed Ghasseminejad, an Iranian dissident and associate fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD).

However, “the result has been disastrous: Iran controls 3 Arab capitals (Damascus, Beirut, and Baghdad) and its allies just captured the fourth one (Sana in Yemen) and Iran’s economy has significantly improved,” Ghasseminejad explained.

“Unfortunately, it does not seem that the mullahs reached the conclusion desired by the administration,” he said. “Iranians believe this administration is weak, it has lost its economic leverage over Iran and there is no credible military option on the table. Iran has been rewarded upfront, they now ask for more while are determined to keep their nuclear program intact.”

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/top-iranian-official-obama-is-the-weakest-of-u-s-presidents/

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Obama's Leadership
« Reply #194 on: October 27, 2014, 12:54:41 PM »
It sounds like a number of Democrats don't believe he's a good leader.


Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Obama's Leadership
« Reply #195 on: October 31, 2014, 02:43:42 PM »
Disrespecting one of our closest allies?  Brilliant leadership. 

Leak week: Obama team shows signs of strain as anonymous officials take gripes to media
Published October 31, 2014
FoxNews.com

Trouble-making personnel inside the Obama administration have taken to the press at a steady clip in recent days to badmouth senior officials, as well as a key American ally. And as President Obama enters his seventh year in office, the whispers and potshots are running the risk of undermining the once-cohesive image of the "no drama Obama" team.

Whether it's a few leaky apples or the sign of a larger morale problem is unclear. But several stories with sharp-edged quotes attributed to unnamed administration officials have culminated in an embarrassing week for the White House -- complete with plenty of backpedaling and clarifications to assert a polished narrative that all is well.

But the tarnish may be showing.

Frustrated officials have started to air their grievances on everything from the current relationship between the U.S. and Israel to the military response in Syria.

The latest batch of stories started on Monday, when The Atlantic magazine quoted an anonymous official describing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as a “chickenshit.” The comment follows weeks of heated exchanges between Netanyahu’s government and Washington over disputed settlement-building.

“The thing about Bibi is, he’s a chickenshit,” the official was quoted as saying.


The article caused a furor, as Republicans demanded accountability for the anonymous insult to America's ally. White House and State Department officials insisted the remark does not reflect the administration's views, and White House officials reportedly were calling lawmakers to hammer home that point.

Not everyone was buying the administration's contrite tone. Fox News contributor Judith Miller suggested that comment was "authorized," to "send a message to Israel."

But other comments clearly were not green-lighted by the White House. In the latest episode, ticked-off military officials told The Daily Beast they were frustrated by the tight constraints the White House is placing on them in the war against the Islamic State in Syria.

Disgruntled officers and civilian Pentagon leaders reportedly claimed that National Security Adviser Susan Rice, who is calling much of the shots on U.S. operations in Syria, is “obsessed with the tiniest of details” and referred to the process as “manic.”

The White House reportedly has instructed the military to keep the war contained within policy limits which include restrictions on which rebels can be trained to fight and what their roles will be in the field. The sources said Rice’s micro-managing of basic operational details is tying their hands and holding up progress.

Earlier, on Wednesday, The New York Times reported that Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel also was a critic of the White House strategy in Syria. Hagel recently wrote a memo to Rice warning that the current strategy was too unfocused and didn’t clearly address U.S. intentions and how it relates to Syrian President Bashir al-Assad, the Times reported.

Hagel did not back off his comments on Thursday, saying, “We owe the president and we owe the National Security Council our best thinking on this. And it has to be honest and it has to be direct.”

The perception of a harmonious Cabinet was further dented following another claim in the Times article that officials routinely joked Secretary of State John Kerry is like the astronaut Sandra Bullock plays in the movie “Gravity,” and that he’s “somersaulting through space, un-tethered from the White House.”

The article seemed to suggest that Obama’s once tight-knit circle of confidants has come apart in recent months as more and more staff members resign or retire. Personnel shakeups have led some to question the effectiveness of the president’s crisis-management teams.

The comments prompted Earnest and White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough to come to Kerry’s defense. Sort of.

“Those of us working every day at [the] White House aren’t distracted by sometimes colorful, sometimes problematic, and in the case of Sandra Bullock, sometimes amusing comments,” Earnest told reporters.

McDonough also defended Obama’s chief diplomat, telling Bloomberg Television “that picture of Secretary Kerry is not what I witness.” He added that Obama and Kerry meet regularly and described the relationship as “very solid.”

McDonough also refuted rumors of a rift between Kerry and Rice, insisting they have a collaborative relationship.

Whether the administration is hunting down the officials quoted remains to be seen. Earnest gave no indication there would be a vigorous hunt for the official behind the Netanyahu dig.

The shots aren't just coming from inside the administration, either. On a lighter note, another influential figure badmouthed the president this week -- Michael Jordan.

When asked about the president’s golf game during a recent interview Jordan said, “I’ve never played with Obama, but I would.” He added, “I’d take him out. He’s a hack and I’d be all day playing with him … I never said he wasn’t a great politician. I’m just saying he’s a shi--y golfer.”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/10/31/tough-week-for-obama-as-frustrated-officials-air-their-grievances-to-media/

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Obama's Leadership
« Reply #196 on: November 05, 2014, 07:36:12 AM »
It's time for the president to lead.  He will have to work with Congress.  He has to start with repairing damaged relationships with his own party.

Dems blame losses on Obama
By Justin Sink - 11/04/14

Democrats dismayed with the loss of the Senate are pointing the finger squarely at President Obama.

In race after race across the country, vulnerable Democrats were unable to shed the shadow of a deeply unpopular White House.

Voters appeared eager to punish Obama after two years defined by crisis and mismanagement, and Republicans saw consistent success by labeling their opponents as potential rubber stamps for the president.

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) said the president’s energy policies “absolutely” hurt Democratic chances among voters in coal country, and that voters in his state had the “perception of the government attacking them, which basically is what's happening.”

“It doesn't make sense that we have to fight so hard against our own government and our own administration and our president to try to find a balance,” Manchin told MSNBC.

According to exit polls, two-thirds of voters believe the country is on the wrong track, and half disapprove of the president’s job performance.

As the dust settled Tuesday night, top Democratic aides and strategists vented frustration with an administration they say could have done more to help the party out.

“It was President Obama dragging candidates down across the country,” one Senate Democratic aide said. “It was a tough map to start with and his numbers were especially bad in these states, making it that much harder to overcome.”

They lamented that the president repeatedly nationalized the election, even though he knew that he was unpopular in many 2014 battleground states.

In a speech that effectively kicked off his midterm campaign, Obama said that while he was not on the ballot, his policies were.

Just a few weeks later, he told Al Sharpton that Democrats in Republican-leaning states reticent to appear with him “vote with me” and “have supported my agenda in Congress.”

Even if Obama hadn’t tied the races to himself, Democrats say the last two years allowed Republicans to turn the race into a referendum on his presidency.

“It’s an inescapable fact that this election was more about Obama and frustration with his presidency than any other factor,” said one prominent Democratic strategist. “You can blame in some cases bad strategy, bad candidacy, bad ads — but the one ring that unites them all was anger and frustration toward Obama's policies.”

While Democrats said the map was stacked against Obama, they also blamed multiple crises for hurting the Obama and Democratic brands.

Just 44 percent of voters approve of the federal government’s handling of the Ebola crisis, according to exit polls. Meanwhile, 72 percent are fearful of a terrorist attack on U.S. soil.

“They had a positive story they could have told on the economy,” the strategist said. “It's not perfect, but you have positive jobs growth, GDP growth, and that message was completely overwhelmed by a series of management missteps that began almost immediately after he walked in for the second term.”

Another Democrat involved in the campaigns said the president’s strategy of relying heavily on executive orders allowed Republicans to escape responsibility for dysfunction in Washington. The executive action was intended to show a White House willing to act, but also invited criticism.

“The pen-and-phone strategy was a little shortsighted and a little naive, and it took the pressure off Congress to do their job,” said one strategist.

Liberals have criticized Obama for failing to move to the left.

“President Obama needs to care more about the economic issues that everyday Americans care about than the fringe positions that House Republicans and Ted Cruz care about,” the liberal Progressive Change Campaign Committee argued.

Still, Democratic strategist Doug Thornell cautioned against reading too much into the Republican victory, noting that most loses were in states Mitt Romney won in 2012.

Obama has also made that point, telling a radio station on Monday that many of the states hosting 2014 contests “tend to tilt Republican.”

“It would not be wise to draw as broad a conclusion about the outcome of this election as you would from a national presidential election, simply by virtue of the map and the states where this contest is taking place,” White House press secretary Josh Earnest said this week.

The White House has also argued that Obama could have done more for Democrats — except many said he should stay away.

Several robocalls the president cut for candidates didn’t go out until hours before the polls opened. And while Obama went on radio for gubernatorial candidates and Sen. Kay Hagan (D-N.C.), other campaigns presumably declined similar outreach efforts.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/222956-dems-blame-losses-on-obama

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39387
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama's Leadership
« Reply #197 on: November 05, 2014, 10:16:31 AM »
New York (AFP) - For a second year in a row, Russian President Vladimir Putin has beaten Barack Obama to the title of world's most powerful leader as ranked by Forbes. In a year in which Russia annexed Crimea, stoked a conflict in the Ukraine and clinched a multi-billion-dollar gas pipeline deal with China that Forbes called the world's largest construction project, Putin remained on top.

It was the third time in Obama's presidency that he has lost top billing -- twice to Putin and once to Chinese leader Xi Jinping. Third prize went to Jinping, who is expected to rule for a decade in which China is set to eclipse the United States as the world's largest economy.

Pope Francis was number four and German Chancellor Angela Merkel number five.

Among 12 newcomers are Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, number 15; Alibaba founder and China's richest man Jack Ma, number 30; and Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the self-proclaimed caliph of the Islamic State group, number 54.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Obama's Leadership
« Reply #198 on: November 05, 2014, 10:19:03 AM »
Dang.   :-[

Top Iranian Official: Obama is ‘The Weakest of U.S. Presidents’

I don't put a lot of stock into what iran's leaders say.   They used to bash Bush too. 

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Obama's Leadership
« Reply #199 on: November 05, 2014, 10:37:41 AM »
I don't put a lot of stock into what iran's leaders say.   They used to bash Bush too. 

Yes, your posts on the board demonstrate quite clearly that you don't take kindly to criticism of Obama.