15 thoughts on “Twitter: “Wasn’t that an …”

  1. Joe Mama

    Some compliment. Acknowledging that his predecessor is patriotic and cares about the troops is more like damning with faint praise. Obama has no class at all.

  2. gahrie

    If you understand two things about Pres. Obama, you understand his speech last night:

    1) He will never, ever, admit that he was wrong about something.

    2) He has no idea what the word gracious means.

  3. Brendan Loy

    Joe Mama, that was my reaction too. I’m sure it wasn’t intended the way it sounded to us, but that’s not really much of a defense.

  4. B. Minich

    Indeed. Seems dumb.

    Also, saw Robert Gibbs outright lying today. Gibbs said yesterday that “President Obama, candidate Obama” had always supported the surge. MSNBC then immediately played a clip of Obama saying how e surge would make the security situation worse. Do people think we live in the 1950s, where the technology didn’t exist to keep this stuff and air it later? Do they think we are idiots?!?! I had a vague recollection that Obama hadn’t always been for the surge, but MSNBC easily proved my vague suspicion that would have been unprovable 30 years ago.

  5. kcatnd

    “1) He will never, ever, admit that he was wrong about something.”

    Obama admits reference to Auschwitz was wrong:
    http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2740383620080527

    Obama admits he “screwed up” over Tom Daschle appointment:
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/4452474/Barack-Obama-admits-he-screwed-up-over-Tom-Daschle-appointment.html

    And that’s just from the first page of Googling. Bush had to reluctantly admit he was wrong back in 2005 about the intelligence that led us into the war in the first place, and only after it was completely obvious to everybody. In fact, he couldn’t even identify a single mistake his administration had made when asked back in 2007. He’s since admitted errors with Iraq, etc. at the end of his term, but you’re being ridiculous and oversimplifying with Obama. You’re, uh, biased.

    You really need to check out this Google. I can find all sorts of things with it, and it really helps me gain some perspective before making stupid claims.

    For the record though, I wasn’t that impressed with Obama’s speech either, and he really should have given more credit for the surge.

  6. Sandy Underpants

    80% of Americans think the war with Iraq was a mistake. You want Obama to give Bush credit for what? Getting the United States into a 7 year war we never should have fought in the first place? Mis-representing the intelligence (or outright lying) to gain support? Scary people to support the invasion by talking about Mushroom clouds around cities of America?

    The fact that Obama mentioned that Bush is a patriot and loves this country is a HUGE stretch considering that Bush put his party ahead of what was best for America in nearly every decision he ever made as president. Plus mentioning the former President by name, who had the lowest approval rating in American history is only going to hurt the person saying it.

  7. Brendan Loy

    Then he shouldn’t have said anything at all. No one put a gun to Obama’s head and forced him to praise Bush. If he wasn’t going to give Bush at least some degree of credit for the change of course in 2007 (spurred, admittedly, by the political reality that “staying the course” wasn’t an option after the GOP got its clock cleaned in November ’06) that led to the “surge” (which Obama opposed), and was instead going to say nothing more than “he supports the troops,” then he shouldn’t have said anything about Bush at all.

    I don’t really disagree all that much with the substance of Obama’s position, but the way he chose to express it came off, to me, as classless, amateurish, and unpresidential.

  8. Jim Kelly

    I’m a little mystified as to why people Obama’s speech was seen as low class. Obviously there’s something to the position, if everyone but the usual suspects feels this way, but I’m not seeing it.

    What’s low class about saying that while they may have disagreed on policy nobody should question Bush’s motives or commitment? It’s certainly far more credit than many on the left would give Bush. It seems to me like that’s precisely the presidential position to take.

    If I had to guess what has everyone’s panties in a bunch, it’d be that he didn’t give Bush credit for the surge? I suppose it would have been politically expedient to do so, and in honesty he probably should have just to keep people from whining. But all it would serve to do is perpetuate the myth that the surge worked, which I don’t think is actually substantiated by facts. Is that it?

  9. Joe Mama

    Plus mentioning the former President by name, who had the lowest approval rating in American history is only going to hurt the person saying it.

    First, that is just wrong. Truman had the all-time lowest approval rating. (How is he regarded nowadays? Oh, nevermind…)

    Second, it would seem that mentioning Bush by name might not hurt pols today in swing states like Ohio, where the former President is more preferable right now to the current one by a 50-42 margin.

  10. Alasdair

    Brendan # 7 – “…the way he chose to express it came off, to me, as classless, amateurish, and unpresidential.” – ummm, that is a remarkably succinct description of what quite a number of us have felt about Mr Obama for a *long* time …

    So – do you wish to denounce yourself as racist, now ? Or would you like someone else to do so ? (grin)

Comments are closed.