What non-US media thinks

[The Third Man]

This is an article from the Telegraph. I don't know the politics of the publication but was searching the web, and this was the first thing which popped up.

The stunning decline of Barack Obama

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100050412/the-stunning-decline-of-barack-obama-10-key-reasons-why-the-obama-presidency-is-in-meltdown/

[Méo]

and try to look at what non-US medias think about George W. Bush...

[The Third Man]

and try to look at what non-US medias think about George W. Bush...

Brilliant!

[Méo]

Brilliant!

I must say, I didn't think you would reply with this. :hmmm:

[The Third Man]

I must say, I didn't think you would reply with this. :hmmm:

And I don't know how I could have overlooked the answer? It is just so obvious.

[Méo]

And I don't know how I could have overlooked the answer? It is just so obvious.

It's just that people here easily get flamed about politics.

Cool to see you're not. ;)

[The Third Man]

It's just that people here easily get flamed about politics.

Cool to see you're not. ;)

Well I don't know how I missed Mr. Obama's message that it is Bush's fault, and that 18 months in office mean nothing. I need to get back to reality and stop looking at other thoughts as having any truth.

[SteamWake]

Try to find 'good' press about Bush in the mainstream american media.

Now find 'good' press about Obama.

Which one was easier? :salute:

[mookiemookie]

Same old talking points.

often dull presidential speeches and statements delivered via teleprompter. ...like every other president and politician has for the past 20 years. Seriously, what is this obsession with the teleprompter? It's like bashing a news anchor for wearing makeup or trashing the weatherman for having a computer weather map behind him.

[Sailor Steve]

...medias...
:nope:

Media is plural. One is a medium.

[TLAM Strike]

:nope:

Media is plural. One is a medium.
Would that make "Multimedia" a double positive? :hmmm:

[August]

Seriously, what is this obsession with the teleprompter? It's like bashing a news anchor for wearing makeup or trashing the weatherman for having a computer weather map behind him.

No it's not. The weatherman and news anchor can both do their jobs without those aids if they had to. From what I've seen Obama can't hardly speak at all if he's not reading from a teleprompter.

Besides this isn't about any other President. Talk about talking points! Is this always going to be the Democrat answer to criticism? "Yeah but our predecessors were bad too"? Good luck with that strategy in 2012.

[The Third Man]

The weatherman and news anchor can both do their jobs without those aids if they had to.


Well maybe.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDVePgwBiqA&feature=related

[Sailor Steve]

Same old talking points.

...like every other president and politician has for the past 20 years. Seriously, what is this obsession with the teleprompter? It's like bashing a news anchor for wearing makeup or trashing the weatherman for having a computer weather map behind him.
Before television Presidents (and everyone else) always had their speeches on paper. In front of them. Where they could read them.

I'm no fan of Obama, but this guy doesn't have a clue. He brings up 10 points, and proceeds to get everything wrong.

1. Out of Touch: Of course the president is out of touch with the people. He's in a unique position, and can no longer be "One of the people". Anyone remember the big deal the left made out of George Bush senior being fascinated by a supermarket optical scanner? "He doesn't even know what it's like to be a real person anymore!"

And the first lady? First ladies make goodwill trips to other countries. That's what they do.

2. Most Americans don't have confidence in his leadership: Guess what? The public is fickle. If the president doesn't do something great and wonderful every day, he's no longer what we thought he was. It happens to every president.

3. Fails to inspire: Same thing. If he doesn't inspire us all to new and better things every single week, he's lost his touch.

4. The US is drowning in debt: And has been for as long as I can remember. Though I will give the guy some slack on this one, as his observation that Obama is "Actively" growing the debt is observably true.

5. Big Government message is falling flat: If you listen to Conservative talk radio you always believed that. I'll bet there a millions of dedicated liberals who haven't lost their faith. The only real evidence of that statement will be the next election.

6. Obama's support for health care is a huge political mistake: A huge mistake? I agree. But a huge political mistake? See #5. Time, and only time, will tell.

7. His handling of the BP spill is weak and indecisive: To his enemies, sure. What to his friends thing?

8. Foreign policy an embarrassing mess: I agree, but that doesn't mean his presidency is on the decline. Again, it comes down to what everybody thinks, not just those who don't like him.

9. National Security: See #8.

10. Doesn't believe in American greatness: No, he just doesn't believe in your vision of American greatness.

I keep wondering whether this guy is a conservative who wants to dislike Obama or a liberal who has lost his faith. His observations on open warfare between the president and other liberals have some merit, but his whole article reads to me like the writing of someone who is stating what he wants to be so, not what he actually sees.

[AVGWarhawk]

Quite frankly I think too much is expected of one man.

[August]

You might like this one better Steve:

http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/obama-is-victim-of-bushs-failed-promises-by-chuck-green/blog-308011/

Obama is victim of Bush's failed promises

Barack Obama is setting a record-setting number of records during his first year in office.

Largest budget ever.
Largest deficit ever.
Largest number of broken promises ever.
Most self-serving speeches ever.
Largest number of agenda-setting failures ever.
Fastest dive in popularity ever.

Wow! Talk about change.

Just one year ago. fresh from his inauguration celebrations. President Obama was flying high. After one of the nation's most inspiring political campaigns, the election of America's first black president had captured the hopes and dreams of millions. To his devout followers, it was inconceivable that a year later his administration would be gripped in self-imposed crisis.

Of course, they don't see it as self-imposed. It's all George Bush's fault.

George Bush, who doesn't have a vote in congress and who no longer occupies the White House, is to blame for it all.

He broke Obama's promise to put all bills on the White House web site for five days before signing them.

He broke Obama's promise to have the congressional health care negotiations broadcast live on C-SPAN.

He broke Obama's promise to end earmarks.

He broke Obama's promise to keep unemployment from rising above 8 percent.

He broke Obama's promise to close the detention center at Guantanamo in the first year.

He broke Obama's promise to make peace with direct, no precondition talks with America's most hate-filled enemies during his first year in office, ushering in a new era of global cooperation.

He broke Obama's promise to end the hiring of former lobbyists into high White House jobs.

He broke Obama's promise to end no-compete contracts with the government.

He broke Obama's promise to disclose the names of all attendees at closed White House meetings.

He broke Obama's promise for a new era of bipartisan cooperation in all matters.

He broke Obama's promise to have chosen a home church to attend Sunday services with his family by Easter of last year.

Yes. it's all George Bush's fault. President Obama is nothing more than a puppet in the never-ending. failed Bush administration.
If only George Bush wasn't still in charge, all of President Obama's problems would be solved. His promises would have been kept, the economy would be back on track, Iran would have stopped its work on developing a nuclear bomb and would be negotiating a peace treaty with Israel. North Korea would have ended its tyrannical regime, and integrity would have been restored to the federal government.

Oh, and did I mention what it would be like if the Democrats. under the leadership of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, didn't have the heavy yoke of George Bush around their necks? There would be no ear marks, no closed-door drafting of bills, no increase in deficit spending, no special-interest influence (unions), no vote buying (Nebraska, Louisiana).

If only George Bush wasn't still in charge, we'd have real change by now.

All the broken promises, all the failed legislation and delay (health care reform, immigration reform) is not President Obama's fault or the fault of the Democrat-controlled Congress. It's all George Bush's fault.

Take for example the decision of Eric Holder, the president's attorney general, to hold terrorists' trials in New York City. Or his decision to try the Christmas Day underpants bomber as a civilian.

Two disastrous decisions.

Certainly those were bad judgments based on poor advice from George Bush.

Need more proof?

You might recall that when Scott Brown won last month's election to the U.S. Senate from Massachusetts, capturing "the Ted Kennedy seat," President Obama said that Brown's victory was the result of the same voter anger that propelled Obama into office in 2008. People were still angry about George Bush and the policies of the past 10 years. and they wanted change.

Yes, according to the president, the voter rebellion in Massachusetts last month was George Bush's fault.

Therefore, in retaliation, they elected a Republican to the Ted Kennedy seat, ending a half-century of domination by Democrats.
It is all George Bush's fault.

Will the failed administration of George Bush ever end, and the time for hope and change ever arrive?

Will President Obama ever accept responsibility for something... – anything?

Chuck Green – Denver Post

[mookiemookie]

Besides this isn't about any other President. Talk about talking points! Is this always going to be the Democrat answer to criticism? "Yeah but our predecessors were bad too"? Good luck with that strategy in 2012.

What you just said makes no sense. The point is nobody ever bashed Bush for using a teleprompter. It didn't even enter anyone's mind to. It just goes to show how some of the criticism of Obama has reached the levels of lunacy. There's good criticism out there (your post just above this one, for example) But this aint it.

[The Third Man]

What you just said makes no sense. The point is nobody ever bashed Bush for using a teleprompter. It didn't even enter anyone's mind to. It just goes to show how some of the criticism of Obama has reached the levels of lunacy. There's good criticism out there (your post just above this one, for example) But this aint it.

Correct, Bush was only critisized for the way he said 'nuclear', but nothing about a teleprompter.

[AVGWarhawk]

What you just said makes no sense. The point is nobody ever bashed Bush for using a teleprompter. It didn't even enter anyone's mind to. It just goes to show how some of the criticism of Obama has reached the levels of lunacy. There's good criticism out there (your post just above this one, for example) But this aint it.


Bush...teleprompter? :har: Really? Bush made up works. Like telecaneticprompter. :doh: Bush did not need no stinkin teleprompter.

[Sailor Steve]

Attack journalism has been with us since we've had politics, and I have a lot more respect for the people willing to put themselves on the line than I do for the people who try to bring them down. Or for the people who try to defend them. Both care less about getting things right than they care about "being right", which mainly consists of trying to prove that the other guy is wrong.

As I said, I'm not much of a fan of Obama or his ideas, but I'm even less a fan of people who don't have anything to say but say it anyway.

[mookiemookie]

Bush...teleprompter? :har: Really? Bush made up works. Like telecaneticprompter. :doh: Bush did not need no stinkin teleprompter.

My favorite was always "misunderestimated." :yeah:

[SteamWake]

Number 10 is the most disturbing.

[mookiemookie]

I'm no fan of Obama, but this guy doesn't have a clue. He brings up 10 points, and proceeds to get everything wrong.

I think this one is a little more intellectual and thought out, instead of the bumper sticker sloganeering of the first article

t turns out that Obama, advised primarily by Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod, was so committed to his strategy of bipartisan governance that he insisted on pursuing it, not only at the expense of his campaign promises, but also of his own (and his party's) popularity. Holding his own ideologically disparate party together was difficult enough. But bringing along enough Republicans to demonstrate a good-faith effort—whether they ended up supporting him in the end or not—resulted in legislation that however historic, was so watered down by compromise with corporate lobbyists that it pissed off almost everyone and satisfied pretty much nobody.

Republican presidents traditionally cater to their base or face the punishment. (See "Bush, George H.W.") Democrats shovel [doo doo] in their base's face and tell them they had better act like they like it or face what Bundy called "the wild men in the wings." And it usually works...

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-07-17/obama-democrats-face-a-drubbing-this-fall/full/

[The Third Man]

Sounds like it was written by the 'professional left', that Robert Gibbs was criticizing only a few days ago.

So even Obama doesn't believe what is said in this article. huzza

[Sailor Steve]

My favorite was always "misunderestimated." :yeah:
"Strategery".

[Torvald Von Mansee]

Try to find 'good' press about Bush in the mainstream american media.

Now find 'good' press about Obama.

Which one was easier? :salute:

Just go to Fox/Washington Examiner/Washington Times/New York Post and you'll find your answer.

[Méo]

:nope:

Media is plural. One is a medium.

Sorry for that...

I did't expect such condescension from you.

Btw, you forgot to tell it to the OP...:88)

[Sailor Steve]

Sorry for that...

I did't expect such condescension from you.
Sorry. You corrected him, and your correction was wrong, so I corrected you. It wasn't meant to be condescending, but rather an answer to an answer.

Btw, you forgot to tell it to the OP...:88)
His use of "media" was correct. Nothing to tell. :sunny:

[Tribesman]

I keep wondering whether this guy is a conservative who wants to dislike Obama or a liberal who has lost his faith. His observations on open warfare between the president and other liberals have some merit, but his whole article reads to me like the writing of someone who is stating what he wants to be so, not what he actually sees.
He is a right wing conservative from the heritage foundation.

[Sailor Steve]

He is a right wing conservative from the heritage foundation.
Thank you.