at least of what those Obama supporters on here keep on saying...over and over and over and over...

"Obama’s team continues to blame America’s problems on his predecessor. But as Tuesday’s vote made clear, voters are holding 44 accountable.

An economy in recession. An ever-deepening deficit. An increase in terrorist attacks. And an angry, divided electorate. If only Bush had not won that third term. So says Barack Obama.

Much like the schoolyard taunt,” I'm rubber, you're glue,” President Barack Obama, the actual current occupant of the Oval Office, continues to deflect criticism of his administration’s failures by persistently pointing the finger of blame back at his predecessor. Even on day 485."

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-a...-blaming-bush/

It is the mantra of the White House now....it is NEVER this WH's fault...THEY are always correct !

"The playbook going forward is clear: look back, blame Bush, and blame the partisanship divide on the minority party. It’s sad to see that polls—not principles—are the driving force behind Obama’s message."

The write also adds that he LEFT McCains campaign because he felt that the message of Obama was good and he did not want to campaign against what he PROMISED.

I certainly wouldn't argue that there isn't any "blame the previous guy" going on.

What nobody will say is why it was OK for Reagan to do it from 1981 through the '84 elections, but Obama's getting flack for it now.

For the record, I believed Reagan was right - it WAS going to take more than 4 years to undo and recover.

Originally Posted by djplong

I certainly wouldn't argue that there isn't any "blame the previous guy" going on.

What nobody will say is why it was OK for Reagan to do it from 1981 through the '84 elections, but Obama's getting flack for it now.

For the record, I believed Reagan was right - it WAS going to take more than 4 years to undo and recover.

Certainly not surprised that DJPLONG would feel this way...actually you would have shocked me if you felt any other way.

I think the point of the article was a man who campaigned on a new way of politics and immediately when he entered the oval office, played the old game...nothing new. Transparency, bi partisanship, all the pretty words during the campaign were just that...WORDS !

This may be the most POLITCALLY RUTHLESS WH in my lifetime !

promises everything and delivers nothing.

A politician.....a lawyer....no business sense....no leadership ability/capability.
They are trained masters at wordsmithing, using the law to their advantage or hiding behind when appropriate to their cause.
Say what they think the audience wants to hear, ignoring the will of the majority, and on and on and on.

OK for all those who play the blame or point the finger game...my question to Obama or his supporters would be.....OK so you inherited a _ _ ? _ _ (fill in the blank), so what have YOU done about it? What are YOU going to do about it? And please Mister President don't waste my time telling me how we/you got to this point. What I want to know is what are you going to do about? How long will it take? How much is it going to cost. And who is responsible to make it happen....a real name not an organization or some nebulous term like the WH.
No script required just tell me what YOU are going to do about?

The blame game is for the school yard and executive wannabes.

btk

Originally Posted by billethkid

promises everything and delivers nothing.

A politician.....a lawyer....no business sense....no leadership ability/capability.
They are trained masters at wordsmithing, using the law to their advantage or hiding behind when appropriate to their cause.
Say what they think the audience wants to hear, ignoring the will of the majority, and on and on and on.

OK for all those who play the blame or point the finger game...my question to Obama or his supporters would be.....OK so you inherited a _ _ ? _ _ (fill in the blank), so what have YOU done about it? What are YOU going to do about it? And please Mister President don't waste my time telling me how we/you got to this point. What I want to know is what are you going to do about? How long will it take? How much is it going to cost. And who is responsible to make it happen....a real name not an organization or some nebulous term like the WH.
No script required just tell me what YOU are going to do about?

The blame game is for the school yard and executive wannabes.

btk

A full blown press conference, uncontrolled, would be a fresh start !

http://www.prosebeforehos.com/govern...f-george-bush/

It might take a little longer than 2 years to clean up the mess the republicns left.

......how about a response to what is being done about the "mess"....to fix the "mess"....who is currently responsible for the "mess" being worked on.

Obama chose to run for POTUS and all it encompasses. The continual insistance on a reference to whose mess is political masturbation.

btk

One could make the argument that people who don't know that it takes more than a few weeks (remember, the complaining started long ago) to fix the biggest economic mess in 70 years while fighting two wars need to be reminded until they stop saying "why isn't it over?". This is why I keep bringing up Reagan. It took more than a few speeches to get things right.

That being said, and while I still think that electing McCain/Palin would have been worse, I *personally* think that the direction Obama is taking us can best be described as "it could have been worse". I don't see a coordinated plan of attack. It seems to me that it's always one squeaky wheel at a time.

In the UK they took NINE DAYS to come up with a comprehensive bi-partisan plan with innumerable action items. You might call it the Contract for the United Kingdom. Here it takes us months to argue evetly little detail of every topic with nothing being done. And partisanship rules everything.

When the GOP suggested a deficit review committee, Obama liked it. As soon as he said that, 7 GOP senators withdrew their support. That's putting Party before Country.

And there's a huge difference between the UK election system and ours.
Over there, campaigns are time-limited, as is advertising. Do you think this Congress would propose such limitations? I wish they would but it'll never happen.
The lobbyist-donors do not want it and print, radio & TV would lose millions in ad revenue.

Oh it'll never happen here, but that's because limits on campaign speech would be considered unconstitutional. Like or not, that's the way it is here.