Prev
Next

Great rhetoric doesn’t make a great leader

Xavier Symons

by Xavier Symons

01 Aug 05:55am

Must Reads

Eurovision can’t drown out the human rights abuses - this is a caption

Eurovision can’t drown out the human rights abuses

14

Revenge. It doesn’t get a whole lot better than this - this is a caption

Revenge. It doesn’t get a whole lot better than this

50

Friday dilemma: can school bullies grow out of it? - this is a caption

Friday dilemma: can school bullies grow out of it?

121

Filed under: Barack Obama, Government, Julia Gillard, Leaders, Politics, United States

81 comments

UPDATE: US President Barack Obama has announced that a deal has been signed to raise the debt ceiling, saying “the leaders of both parties… have reached an agreement that will reduce the deficit and avoid default”.

A fine speaker but are his arguments too ideological? Photo: Herald Sun

The gods are angry in Asgard. Odin is hurling thunderbolts at Balder. Balder is whirling his two-handed berserker sword. Puny earthlings are trampled underfoot. And this is before Götterdämmerung on August 2, when the US financial system threatens to collapse, taking the world with it in a vortex of fire and ruin.

You know, I’m just a wee bit weary of the American penchant for transforming their politicians into gods and goddesses. Think I’m exaggerating? Check out the August edition of Esquire magazine, where Obama is put forward as a kind of spiritual deity.

Journalist Stephen Marche labels him ‘The Hegelian world spirit’: “He is an embodiment of the spirit of the times…he is what we hope we can be”. In the same article Obama is compared to the magnificence of a ‘Vermeer painting’. This may sound like a parody. But the author of the article is alarmingly serious in his conclusions.

Indeed, this article forms part of a string of media tributes to Obama, dating back to the music clip of the 2008 Yes We Can speech. There we find countless celebrities - Scarlet Johansson, Chris Rock, Will.I.am from the Black Eyed Peas - boogieing to the Obama’s rhetoric.

It’s a pleasure to listen to him speak. But it is also important that we can assess his arguments. And this is something hard to do when you are boxed in by good rhetoric.

Obama has been trying to persuade Americans that his solution to the debt crisis is ’balanced’.  His argument makes a lot of sense. But it does have an ideological slant (so too does the Republican position, I might add). It was only after he finished speaking that one remembers his partisanship.

When he speaks, he has the air of an ordinary, reasonable man who knows your problem and has the perfect solution for it.

It is ironic that a good politicians can sometimes be bad for the country. Obama has the potential to be one of these politicians. He could make the citizens assembly for climate change seem like a fantastic idea.

I prefer the ordinary politicians we have in Australia. Our PM wears funny green dresses, has a nasally voice, and speaks like a primary school teacher. In contrast to Obama’s faultless expression, the PM gets muddled up on ‘hyperbole’ and ‘high dudgeon” (Or should I say high dungeon?).

The opposition leader chats to the press in his speedos, and holds the record for the longest media stall in history. With these two, you don’t get inebriated by the rhetoric. But this is actually really good. We can cut through to the arguments, and see their strengths and flaws.

I love listening to Obama speeches. But I think I prefer having a slightly awkward leader of the country. Her bloopers keep us on our feet. 

Most commented

429Australia, you have nothing to fear but fear itself
390There's no one Thomson won't burn to save his skin
333Animal experiments won't cure me from cancer
313Thomson didn't answer the question everyone is asking
265Who murdered the Arts degree?
246A big day for Thomson, who thus far is guilty of nothing...
231South Australia. It's the middle bottom bit.
231Craig Thomson speaks. Meanwhile, in Australia...

81 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Mahhrat says:

      06:00am | 01/08/11

      I’d rather have competent ones, if it’s all the same to you.

      What is this, “Let’s see how crap our pollies can get before we all explode” day?  C’mon guys, you’re all crap.

      For the U.S, someone go wake Bill Gates up, give him some money, and tell him to fix the economy.  Bet you he (and his team) could do it right quick smart.

      Reply

    • Chris L says:

      12:05pm | 01/08/11

      I like your idea Mahhrat. The mere act of seeking leadership should disqualify those applying for it. Instead countries should draft people who have a proven record for administration and give them a set goal to achieve whereupon they will be released from public service.

    • Erick says:

      06:23am | 01/08/11

      Obama is a product of the fawning media. He was only elected because the American media almost unanimously built him up into a godlike figure. Journalists failed to give any scrutiny at all to Obama’s background, his associations, his achievements or his actual behaviour.

      Only Fox News and a handful of honourable others were an exception to this fawning adulation. And they were right. Obama isn’t even popular for his rhetoric any more: his approval rating stands at around 40% in all the major polls. It was over 80% when he was inaugurated.

      Obama is incompetent and incapable of effective negotiation or compromise. To those of us not drenched in the syrup of mainstream media Obama-worship this was obvious all along. It’s becoming obvious to the bulk of the American people now. Hopefully, those people will remember who was to blame for the election of this impediment to recovery.

      Reply

    • Tedd says:

      07:15am | 01/08/11

      It is appropriate to put Obama in context of attaining the presidency as the US-initiated GFC hit, after a decade of expensive wars and reduced govt income after Republican inspired tax cuts (On the other hand, the Democrats had, before Obama’s ascendency, contributed to the GFC by several years previously advocating no-fault mortgages).

      He also has had a hostile Congress to deal with.  The failure of US society to recognise a wealth first-world nation looks after its disadvantaged, as the Europeans do, is the hallmark of a wealthy nation (as is a nation in which its citizens take personal responsibility to financial matters such as mortgages).

      It is not just about personalities or expectations of those.

      Obama has steered the US away from foreign commitments, such as getting NATO to take a lead on Libya and scaling down US commitment to Iraq and Afghanistan, to focus on their overwhelming domestic issues.  They primarily need to increase govt income by paying more tax.

    • Carz says:

      07:17am | 01/08/11

      “Obama is a product of the fawning media. He was only elected because the American media almost unanimously built him up into a godlike figure.”

      No Erick, he was elected because America would prefer to have an African-American male president than a female vice-president, which was the option they faced.

    • Tedd says:

      07:35am | 01/08/11

      Carz,
      The Democrats had that choice. The American people then had a cholce between Obama and McCain.

    • KH says:

      07:41am | 01/08/11

      Carz - the female in question was Sarah Palin.  They had a choice between someone with a brain, and someone without one.  Fortunately, they went with the brain.

    • Warren says:

      08:03am | 01/08/11

      “Fox News and a handful of honourable others”

      hahahahahahahahahahaha ......

    • Erick says:

      08:03am | 01/08/11

      @Tedd - The GFC was at least in part caused by the collapse of Fannie & Freddy, which in turn was caused by policies that were supported by Senator Obama and opposed by President Bush.

      The “expensive wars” had, and still have, an insignificant role in the GFC. The total cost of the wars of the last decade is less than a third of Obama’s ineffective stimulus spending in the first months of his presidency. As usual, the vast majority of US government spending goes to health and welfare.

      Finally, Obama had a totally Democratic-Party controlled House and Senate for the first two years. His numerous failures simply cannot be blamed on the opposition.

      Face it, he’s a dud. And more Americans realise this every day.

      @Carz - You can’t possibly be serious.

    • Tedd says:

      08:17am | 01/08/11

      “The “expensive wars” had, and still have, an insignificant role in the GFC.”
      @ Erick.

      I agree, but did not say they did have a role in the GFC.

      Yes, the % US govt spending on health care is way above what other countries spend - >14% cf ~9-10% - and rising. A significant part of this is the cost of their silly middle-man insurance & entrepreneurial system.

      The stimulus spending was going to happen regardless of who was president- they were dire times for the USA.

    • Economist says:

      09:07am | 01/08/11

      Erick, that’s the right wing mantra to divert from the true cause of the GFC. FM amd FMc were the largest providers of lending under the Community Reinvestment Act . However of the toxic CDOs, only around 25% related to the CRA. The vast majority of toxic loans were lent out by other instituions other than FM and FMc

      What lead to the GFC? Unmitigated greed. Dergulation to the point where investment banks got around exisitng regulation designed to protect lending banks (and relaxation of the net asset rule), where they held mortgage backed securities for speculative purposes and demanded more of these securities from insitutions like FM and FMc. This combined with artifically lowering of interest rates via Bush/Greenspan created a bubble not just in the housing market but also the commercial real estate market. When the bubble burst, CDOs, derivatives, credit swaps were worthless.

      Now as for Obama, he’s contributed to the debt ceiling crisis by increasing mandatory spending through welfare and health care iniatives, as did Bush. you cannot just pin it to one politician. Erick he may be a dud in your opinion, but by joves he’s far more competent then Bush ever was and arguably McCain/Palin.

    • Rick says:

      09:10am | 01/08/11

      Could it be somthing to do with the wacky right republicans starting one too many wars? It costs a lot to dominate the world.

    • JOhn the Zombie says:

      09:16am | 01/08/11

      Has anyine had a look at the time magazine breakup of spending for the coming week. Sadly the largest expence to the US is social security making up over 29 Billion dollars a week as compared to about 6 billion in regards to the wars. Also I would like to know what portion of the amount that is allocated to the wars would be normally paid to the soldiers, eg there base salary.

      Two days ago the Republicans put up a package that all in all was a good one but was voted out be the democrates. The reason why it was voted out is that the Repulican party wanted to reassess the ceiling again next year which would occur at the same time as the running of the next election will occur.

      I was one who supported Obama and hope he would get elected. He promised that he would always be someone who would never be influenced by opinions but he was. This issue let me down and has shown Obama to be a person of single character indtead of someone of substance,

    • andye says:

      09:52am | 01/08/11

      Oh, @Erick. You told me a few days ago I was being partisan, then you throw up a bunch of partisan crap. Irrelevant of whether or not you think of Obama’s performance, the deficit was huge before we had even heard of him.

      And @Tedd. The global financial system wasnt brought down by cheap loans. As @Economist said, only a small percentage of the loans were actually covered by the laws you are talking about after reading some right wing american media that regurgitates the Republican spin to somehow blame the one Democrat president in the middle of 3 Republican ones.

      The problem was financial instruments like Credit Default Swaps and a bubble that formed buying and selling those. The problem wasnt “bad” loans, it was “bad” loans that were being packaged up with better quality loans on a big market that was far removed from people actually getting loans.

    • Erick says:

      10:31am | 01/08/11

      @Tedd - Fair points. However, I don’t agree that the “stimulus” spending was going to happen regardless of the administration. It mostly consisted of payouts to friends of the party in charge, and had no positive effect. In fact, the economy got worse than predicted without a stimulus. And debt skyrocketed.

      @Economist - I said Fanny & Freddy *contributed* to the GFC, not that they *caused* it. Obgama made everything much worse by huge payouts that were not merely useless, but harmful. His other policies have acted to prevent recovery by hurting business. History will judge Obama’s incompetence to be the chief characteristic of his reign.

      @Rick - No. We’ve already covered this. Do try to keep up.

      @andye - Study this useful article. Note the graph showing Obama’s contribution.

    • AdamC says:

      10:52am | 01/08/11

      This ‘who caused the GFC’ debate is tiresome, but can I join in anyway?

      While there were obviously many causes, my pet one that gets insufficient attention is the rise of the ‘shadow banking sector’. Many of the key firms, such as Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers, that were heavily involved in securitisation of loans, etc, were not actually banks, despite being referred to as ‘investment banks’.

      Instead, these firms were regulated like stockbrokers with limited prudential and risk management requirements. Had governments, regulators, and the management of these firms been a little smarter about manageing sysemic risk in the system, we wouldn’t have avoided the GFC altogether, but it would have been less catastrophic.

    • Tom says:

      10:54am | 01/08/11

      KH, can you please explain why you believe Sarah Palin has not got a brain, or are you just chanting one of those self-evident, lefty comfort bleats?

    • Economist says:

      11:32am | 01/08/11

      Erick lots of things contributed to the crisis. You deliberately cite FM and FMc to give it more weight than justified. Its an argument by deceit. It’s an argument used by the right to divert from the more significant factors of poor regulation and accountability, because they don’t want it and can;t admit that deregulation and poor oversight caused the crisis.

    • Tim says:

      11:35am | 01/08/11

      Erick,
      why link the graph from the article the other day?
      It doesn’t show what you think it does.

    • andye says:

      12:10pm | 01/08/11

      @Erick - How much of that curve at the end is due to interest on the 10 trillion that Obama inherited? Bush Jr pushed it from around 6 Trillion to 10 trillion, then Obama inherited that plus the GFC. The rate of increase is going to keep accelerating at this point. It is getting away from them.

      Your criticism of Obama might be more palatable if it wasnt accompanied by reasons why, out of the last 4 presidents before him, only Clinton is responsible for the GFC. The graph you keep touting clearly shows that Clinton was in fact the best out of them all at keeping spending down… but we all know that financial problems are caused by poor people and socialists, right? “Facts” arent as important as repeating mantras about who the right and left are supposed to be, yeah?

    • Bruce says:

      04:58pm | 01/08/11

      Ted and KH. My understanding is that 94% of african americans who voted, voted for Obama. Sounds like a great amount of political consideration was taken into account. I think most analysts knew Obama was light on experience. However, the democrats were very smart, and knew how to win the election, particularly after what was towards the end, a very unpopular republican party.

    • John A Neve says:

      06:40pm | 01/08/11

      Erick,
      I don’t know if you are male, female or a figment of some ones imagination? But whatever, you are wrong..
      Obama is fresh, America needs fresh, he will not get it all right, but at least he is trying.

      The grand old US of A to whome we have sucked up to for years, is at last having to meet it’s commitments. As to Obama’s rating, no one likes to have their lifestyle curbed. But the fact is we all are living beyond our means.
      I don’t care about me, but I feel sorry for your children and grandchildren.

      Tell us Erick, do you really exist?

    • Peter#1 says:

      06:38am | 01/08/11

      Obama is a show pony. He was elected to show the world how tolerant the U.S.A. has become by electing an “African American” to the highest office in the land, in much the same way the Australia “elected” its first female Prime Minister.
      Both were experiments. Both experiments failed dismally and now were are feeling the aftershocks of these blunders.
      The sooner voters realise their error and reverse the situation, the sooner we can have some stability.

      Reply

    • Tedd says:

      07:03am | 01/08/11

      It is easy to criticise a leader for features or attributes that don’t really have anything to with their leadership, but it is important to also look, firstly, at the competition & context in which they became preferred leader of their side of politics and, secondly,  at who they - and their party - were competing against.

      In a decade or so a leaders race or sex will be much less an issue.

    • James In Footscray says:

      09:03am | 01/08/11

      A majority of Americans voted for Obama as an experiment, to show other countries how tolerant they are? The ALP backroom replaced Rudd with Gillard as part of an affirmative action experiment? I’m not sure that’s how politics works ...

    • Mark G says:

      08:17am | 01/08/11

      I discussed this very issue with one of my American friends who has worked in US politics. He made an interesting point in relation to this. He said that Obama, despite his excellent speeches and popularity amongst lobbyists, had relatively few strong political ties for a president. That meant that for him to get anything done he had to rely on good speeches and rhetoric. Presidents like Bush (love him or hate him) had many ties to senior politicians and businessmen and was able to call in favours to push critical policies through. A bit of back door dealing in which he was often able to buy out democrats. This may well have been the problem with the Bush administration and the cause of such policies as the patriot act but I don’t want to get into that here. Point is that Obama’s ability to get the difficult stuff through is very limited because of his lack of political and business connections. He relies on rhetoric and lobbyists to get his point across but unfortunately this on angers the republicans rather than sway them to his point of view.

      What I disagree with in this article is that Julia and/or Tony are any better. These two fit the exact same profile, as do many media sensitive show pony politicians. Both are extremely ideological and good talkers (even if their words appear a bit slurred at times). The issue is that neither has the depth in their political connections or ability to negotiate their points home. Julia had political connections but has probably burnt most of them just to get to where she is. Kissing Bob Brown’s arse one day and them calling him a socialist nutcase that doesn’t represent the average Australian is not a good way to remedy this. She doesn’t really have the support of the Greens and she has burnt bridges in the moderate left and unionist factions by even dealing with them. On Tony. Nobody except the redneck and/or religious right give him the light of day. John Howard (again love him or hate him) had a profound ability to manipulate the Australian political system to his will. Even if you argue that Bush and Howard were the spawn of Satan, you still have to admit that they were clever in politics. Even if they were not particularly clever in other aspects…...particularly Bush.

      Reply

    • Joan Crawfish says:

      08:19am | 01/08/11

      Australians did the same thing with Kevin Rudd.  They treated him like a rock star (goodness knows why) and he thought he was one.

      Reply

    • Rick says:

      09:06am | 01/08/11

      After a decade of Jack Boot Johny anyone would seem like a rock star.

    • fairsfair says:

      09:15am | 01/08/11

      I agree. The only difference between the two is that one’s party dumped one of them when the going got tough. Its seems Obama would not survive the Aust Labor Party, that what I find the funniest part of the fawning.

    • The Rock says:

      11:37am | 01/08/11

      @fairs

      And there hasn’t been any fawning in the media for Abbott? A bloke who failed to deliver anything of note in office, offers no positive vision for the future and despite facing a minority government has failed to get up one piece of legislation? Not even an amendment. Naaah the media only fawns over non-conservatives.

      Blinkers are funny too.

    • fairsfair says:

      01:15pm | 01/08/11

      What media are you watching that is claiming Tony Abbott is the best thing since sliced bread? Holding him in great esteem, the saviour of the nation etc etc? Does “Yes we will” ring any bells with you? Julia even piggy backed on Obama’s rhetoric and the media lapped it up.

      Criticism of the Labor Party does not mean that I am a supporter of the Coalition my friend. I love how you make all those assumptions and state that I am the one wearing the blinkers.

    • The Rock says:

      08:16pm | 01/08/11

      “What media are you watching that is claiming Tony Abbott is the best thing since sliced bread?”

      Have you seen the Bolt Report? I’m willing to bet you have.

      “Criticism of the Labor Party does not mean that I am a supporter of the Coalition my friend. “

      Pretending that you are bi-partisan doesn’t mean you really are either.

    • Nick says:

      02:49pm | 22/08/11

      I could not imagine the scrutiny that these world leaders face. Of course, they know what they are getting into, but it must be tough to deal with day in and day out. With the two party system in the US, it’s almost like competing sports teams with rabid fans. 

      Thus, for all the fawning done on behalf of President Obama, his every move is equally scrutinized by a large segment of the population and media. For example, on one newscast you will see he and his family providing service in their home community while on a Chicago holiday . Yet, on another station, they will be asking the question “how can the President find time away from the White House?” while showing the same exact footage.

      I suppose it is all in the presentation. Personally, I think all of the peripheral stuff that politicians do is not newsworthy. But that is the nature of media today: the celebrity culture reigns supreme.

    • Lucy says:

      08:35am | 01/08/11

      I think he’s a crap speaker….  I’ve never heard him say anything that is inspiring - ever.  He reads off a teleprompter and sounds very monotone.  I actually unconsciously think people think his skin tone is inpiring - in of itselt.

      Reply

    • Anna C says:

      09:05am | 01/08/11

      The Democrats erred in choosing Obama over Hillary Clinton for Presidential candidate.  The problem with Obama is that he has no balls when compared to people like Hillary Clinton.  Is it really any wonder that Obama’s government is a total failure when you select a man who is all talk and no action? While I agree with many that he makes some lovely speeches; a President needs to be tough and ballsy also. 

      I guess this is what happens when you send in a boy to do a man’s job.

      Reply

    • Elphaba says:

      09:14am | 01/08/11

      Hi sproblem is, he’s hog-tied.  The Republicans are happy to watch the entire country go down in flames to prove a point that a black man can’t run the country.

      The legacy left for him to mop up after Bush exited and the mid-term election pummeling means he’s in an untenable situation.  He’s not been given a chance to fix it, and now, it’s a shitstorm.

      The office of POTUS used to be revered, like royalty.  Now, it’s a joke.  We’re watching Rome burn.

      Reply

    • CynicalGoatWA says:

      11:33am | 01/08/11

      Wouldn’t have been any “mid-term election pummeling” if he’d shown any leadership to the country in his first 2 years. Obama is an abject failed experiment who has in 2 and a half short years taken the deficit from 10 tril to just shy of 15, with the promise of another 2 tril to be added before the next election.
      Let’s see what a master orator he is when the government has to sell his teleprompter to start paying back their “unserviceable” debt levels.

    • bananabender says:

      08:22pm | 01/08/11

      Elphaba says:

        09:14am | 01/08/11
      “Hi sproblem is, he’s hog-tied.  The Republicans are happy to watch the entire country go down in flames to prove a point that a black man can’t run the country.”

      Total and unmitigated crap. The Republicans begged Colin Powell (actually black not a spoiled rich white kid like Obama) to run for President.

    • AdamC says:

      09:40am | 01/08/11

      Obama is a good orator, but he has failed to be the unifier he claimed to be. For example, he rammed Obamacare through rather than do a cross-party deal. Likewise, he has failed to engineer an agreement on the debt ceiling. This does not surprise me - leaders who are hyped up usually disappoint.

      Reply

    • BFair says:

      09:49am | 01/08/11

      “The office of POTUS used to be revered, like royalty.”  What you describe is a relatively new phenomenon of the “Cult of the Presidency.”  This is neither healthy nor honorable.  The US presidential powers are limited by the Constitution to military management (though only Congress can declare war) and veto of legislation, which may be overridden by Congress.  The power that presidents have accumulated in addition to these are extraconstitutional and solely a figment of the collective imagination of American citizens.  If the office of POTUS is losing some of its luster, all the better for America.  All the better for the world.  At least according to this American.

      Reply

    • bananabender says:

      08:31pm | 01/08/11

      Exactly. The POTUS far from being the most powerful person in the world has almost no real power at all. This is exactly what the Founding Fathers intended to avoid potential dictatorship.

    • John says:

      09:56am | 01/08/11

      I had to marvel at Erick’s ridiculous post this morning. Obama was a breath of fresh air after the lunatic years of GWB who succeeded in nothing. What do you mean by saying that the press did not scrutinise Obama properly? Are you referring to the notion that he really is a Muslim and was not born in the USA? Would you have preferred Palin, a complete incompetent, to be a potential president? This is troll-like material. As for Fox News being honourable, you are off your trolley.
      Obama managed to achieve what no other president could do-he introduced health care for all not just for those who could pay. The Republicans prefer the laissez-faire approach-who cares about the less fortunate?
      Obama should bite the bullet and make use of the 14th Amendment and secure funds. His attempt at negotiation with the mostly brain-dead Republicans is admirable but futile. The voters who elected the Tea Party lunatics deserve what they get. This is a bunch of wreckers (like Abbott) who have no regard for the country. But withy the polls showing a majority blaming the GOP for this nonsense, at least I take heart that Obama will win again.

      Reply

    • Gratuitous Adviser says:

      09:58am | 01/08/11

      Let’s wait to see what history makes of the Obama period and what it did for the United States and the world. 
      I suspect that it will show an administration lead by a person that broke through the huge second class citizen barrier and who attempted to remedy the previous administrations insane and unfair far right wing policy decisions driven by those great minds in Texas, Fox Television and the “I want to see his birth certificate” brigade, who have now conveniently forgotten all about why and how we got into this mess in the first place.
      How history records the Julia/Abbott period will also be interesting.  I suspect that it will be recorded as a non-event and a waste of time, where the politics of the period was seen by the players as more important than the product they produced for the overall benefit of the great unwashed.

      Reply

    • Chris L says:

      01:23pm | 01/08/11

      @GA - I doubt history will remember either Gillard or Abbott. Very forgettable thus far.

    • bananabender says:

      08:38pm | 01/08/11

      “I suspect that it will show an administration lead by a person that broke through the huge second class citizen barrier….”

      What a load of garbage. Obama has had one of the most privileged backgrounds of any President. His mother was white, wealthy and PhD qualified.  He attended the most exclusive private school in Hawaii and the best universities in the USA. He was barely even aware he was “black” until his 20s.

    • Malleeringneck says:

      10:05am | 01/08/11

      The sooner the USA gets rid of Obama the world will be a better off.
      He is all talk and no substance.
      He was anti war and he just kept on committing US forces and money.
      He is a typical socialist, tells you how to live and then doesn’t do it himself.
      He has wasted money like the Australian socialists, only more of it.
      All they understand is throwing money at something and that will fix it.
      He is typical of that political correctness that now pervades everything and does not one little bit of good.

      Reply

    • andye says:

      12:21pm | 01/08/11

      “political correctness” - OK, so what exactly is that? What problem is it causing?

      PC is a label used by the right to dismiss an opinion. If you decide it is PC then the person holding the opinion is just following dogma, and therefore the opinion isn’t valid, right?

    • Sam says:

      10:32am | 01/08/11

      @Erick says :-

      “....Only Fox News and a handful of honourable others were an exception to this fawning adulation….”

      Wow Erick, i am dumbfounded! I cant believe you would put Fox news and Honourable in the same sentence !!!  Fox News is about as un-biased as “The Bolt Report”!

      What amazes me is that Obama came into power in the middle of the biggest financial drama since the depression, he had plans for what he wanted to do but alas all the Governments time and effort and MONEY had to go into solving the GFC and the US economy.

      Now we have people saying he should go, hes going to be a one term president blah blah blah, how short are peoples memories ? Has everyone forgotten the disaster of the Bush Jnr Administration ?

      Even today I am still amazed that the US people would elect a person like Bush, i guess its the same people that have abandoned Obama because Obama hasnt been able to solve the GFC, Get rid of all US Debt, attain 100% employment, build a new school on every street, replace all the highways, and allow everyone to borrow more than they can afford so they dont have to lower their quality of life etc etc etc

      The US people are their own worst enemy , they reward the worst president their country has had (apart from Nixon) with two terms, Bush Jnr., they fully supported Bush with his wars,  and now abandon a President who is trying to put the pieces back together. If anyone out there can think of a way to repair the damage to the USA in Three years then I would love to hear from them, otherwise how about the US people take some medicine and give Obama some time and help.

      Reply

    • Bev says:

      11:43am | 01/08/11

      What amazes me is that Obama came into power in the middle of the biggest financial drama since the depression, he had plans for what he wanted to do but alas all the Governments time and effort and MONEY had to go into solving the GFC and the US economy.

      If he didn’t have the GFC Obama had plans to dramatically increase welfare type spending.  Then when the GFC hit (it was inevitable) the US would have been in a far worse position than it is now. So in its own way the GFC was a good.

    • Against the Man says:

      11:32am | 01/08/11

      Kevin Rudd and Gillard are all talk with ZERO action or successes to back them up. The key word that is associated with them will always be failure and a fine job they are doing in that area. A fine job indeed.

      Still waiting for that health care reform…...............

      Reply

    • Blind Freddy says:

      11:33am | 01/08/11

      After 8 disastrous years of the lunatic GW Bush the US military industrial complex needed a friendlier (globally acceptable) face so a contest was manufactured between an unelectable geriatric and unhinged dim witted yokel and the affable “moderate” and a long serving Democrat technocrat. McCain and Palin were never intended to win – and they didn’t.

      Smoke, mirrors and public relations. Look at what they do – not what they say.

      Reply

    • Kika says:

      11:46am | 01/08/11

      OMG just default already.

      Reply

    • Thommo says:

      11:53am | 01/08/11

      It’s all about unending war without borders or a defined enemy. read the small print, do the research - everything that happens is stage managed.

      Reply

    • mandy says:

      11:55am | 01/08/11

      Oh yes it does, governments are more and more foucusing on ideals, symbolism. And prior to the GFC and the debt crisis we could afford the left ideals. Problem is we are now in a bit of hold and no matter how big the symbol it aint going to get you know where.

      Reply

    • Cat says:

      12:20pm | 01/08/11

      I get tired of people forgetting that America is a different culture, there may be similarities but most would be shocked at how many differences there are. This propensity for what we interpret as verbose pomp is simply a cultural difference. Here - we find that kind of thing disingenuous and a thunderously glowing sales pitch is met with mockery, but in America it is the norm and not taken in the same way. it doesn’t mean Americans are stupid, just means there is a cultural difference around the use of language, and it is one that anyone doing business between the two countries is aware of - no need to make it into a “we are better than them” when it is just a “we are different to them”.

      Reply

    • P. Darvio says:

      12:47pm | 01/08/11

      Obama cancelled the US Manned Spaceflight program…....he is an idiot. Only because the Congress stood up to him is there now a chance of going beyond low Earth Orbit - although the USA is broke and no doubt NASA’s budget will be cut again, so not much chance of that happening even without the idiot.

      Reply

    • stephen says:

      12:52pm | 01/08/11

      Idealists, like Barack Obama, tend to procrastinate.
      In their head they have the high-blown rhetoric of the highest and noblest ideals, but to put anything to action they need a companion who can do the detail, (and sometimes the dirty work.)
      Hilary, in my opinion, is not that person ; she’s just as idealisitic as The President.
      Perhaps Robert Gates is ; at any rate I’ve often thought that this current Presidency was too ‘high end’ : the top two are just too good, and there aren’t enough Politicians running around with a half-mast tie raising a sweat and swearing at the press-corp.
      Anyway, it’s worked out reasonable enough, especially when America’s poor get to pay some tax, and the rich get persuaded to pay more that 9 %.

      Reply

    • vito says:

      01:52pm | 01/08/11

      Julia Gillard - she lies at every given opportunity! She isn’t a leader, she is a liar and a loser!

      Reply

    • Tedd says:

      02:15pm | 01/08/11

      perhaps you might like to comment about the hung parliament and what that meant for post-election policies ..

      Or, doing something really difficult like addressing world-wide desires to address or negate climate change ...

    • Shane says:

      12:04pm | 02/08/11

      No Vito, you’re a loser.
      Now go away and let the grown ups discuss the real issues. Oh and take Erick with you.

    • bananabender says:

      03:01pm | 01/08/11

      People who are trust into major leadership roles with less than 20-30 years experience are almost always destined to fail.

      Obama’s experience is negligible. In the Australian system he probably wouldn’t be considered ready for a ministry let alone Prime Minister.

      Reply

    • Andy of Sydney says:

      03:21pm | 01/08/11

      Obama is an empty suit. He is good at slogans and handing out edicts. That is all he is good at. In many ways, he is a model on a walkway: pretty, looks good, has the swagger, but completely divorced from and uninvolved with the process of actually designing and drawing up the dress and making it.

      That is where Obama fails. He cannot draft a policy to literally save his (political) life. All he can do is hand out ultimatums and throw temper tantrums. The second he gets called on them, he crumbles into a pile of sobbing “they hate me because I am black!” self-pitying demagougery.

      Another problem with Obama is that the guy is a racist. Not a raaay-cist. That would mean he thinks that he himself is a twit and an empty suit. No. He is a regular, single “a” racist. This was obvious right from the get go, with that professor and policeman case. He is a black supremacist.

      Last but not least, Obama is the worst type of socialist, the fiscally irresponsible one. Facing a debt limit and the threat of default, does he do what virtually any other person (from the one in charge of the household budget to that of a multinational corporation) faced with such a thing would do, i.e., slash spending? No way. There is always more where that came from! Full steam ahead on the spending! In fact, here, have more. I need your votes.

      Obama is a failure of the worst kind. Yet the media loves the fool. Why? He because he is a lefty. Tribalism is never at its worst than at the hands of the left.

      Reply

    • bananabender says:

      03:37pm | 01/08/11

      Obama was a lazy, untalented, rich white kid for the first 20 years of his life. He then realised that he could get a lot further playing the poor black man role to rort Affirmative Action policies.  His scam worked brilliantly until people realised (far too late) that he is utterly devoid of real ability.

    • Chris L says:

      05:13pm | 01/08/11

      If only that rocket scientist GWB could have had another term eh? Really guys, in comparison to who he replaced Obama is doing a fine job. He has made many (foolhardy) attempts to deal with the Republicans, often incorporating ammendments they say they want to his bills, but they end up voting against them anyway. If there was one thing Bush did better it was to ram through what he wanted without concern for anyone’s objections, and this is something Obama needs to do.

    • bananabender says:

      07:50pm | 01/08/11

      Chris L says:

      05:13pm | 01/08/11

      “If only that rocket scientist GWB could have had another term eh?”
      GWB would have easily won another term if the Constitution had allowed him to run again.

      GWB only pretended be an everyman because it won him votes. He adopted this persona after losing his first election for the Texas legislature where he campaigned as a sophisticated Ivy League graduate. 

      GWBs SAT test score indicates that he has an IQ of around 130. This places him in the top 3% of the population.HIs IQ and GPA are higher than than those of Al Gore and John Kerry.

      GWB also has a Harvard MBA. Entrance to the Harvard MBA is extremely competitive and entrance based primarily on the GMAT test which measures reasoning ability and English comprehension.

      Obama is the only President in 40 years who hasn’t released his academic record. He was almost certainly accepted into Columbia and Harvard on an Affirmative Action programme which allows a far lower academic standard.

    • Andy of Sydney says:

      02:46pm | 02/08/11

      Glad to see that the incredibly false meme of the left is in full swing here. Hardly surprising, but still good to know.

      You do realise, Chris L, that they don’t allow kids from the local school for the mentally disabled to fly supersonic interceptors for a living, right?

      You do realise that not only did GWB did that,he is one of a handful of pilots who NEVER crashed a notoriously crashable aircraft in the entire time he flew one, right?

      You do realise that if an old lady were to cross the street, GWB would be one of the first to help her across, right? This has been proven time and again in his ctions during and after his Presidency. Contrast this with Obama walking alone off into the distance, shoulders straight, head high, nose in the air. While the white policeman in the aforementioned racism case helped his elderly black accuser down the steps in the background.

      You also realised that Obama had a Democrat majority in BOTH houses during the first part of his Presidency and nothing came of it, right?

      You are living proof of the tribalism of the left, Chris L. I’d spit on your bias,but it would be a waste of good spittle.

    • Chris L says:

      07:03pm | 03/08/11

      “I’d spit on your bias,but it would be a waste of good spittle.” - You’d miss anyway, Andy, since you seem to be placing me further in one camp than I belong. The only time I used the term “foolhardy” was in reference to Obama’s attempts at bipartisan action. I guess you didn’t notice because when there is no fawning over Bush the post must be from a dirty leftie.

      Good to know piloting ability is so very important to governing ability though. Thanks for that tip. How can we doubt a man that leads little old ladies across the street when his replacement (who tipped GBW’s death threat collection within months of taking office) left it to the police?

    • Andy of Sydney says:

      04:20pm | 04/08/11

      Way to go backpedalling, Chris L.

      Hey, it was only YOU who patronising brought up GWB’s lack of intelligence with your “rockey scientist” crack. Still, good try at claiming being the victim. Typical lefty.

      I wonder where I could have gotten the idea that you were a lefty from…

    • Chris L says:

      04:55pm | 04/08/11

      You’re so right, Andy. Disparaging comments are only acceptable when directed at the left wing, such as in everyone else’s comments in this thread. Thanks for clearing that up you fair and balanced person you grin

    • Andy of Sydney says:

      03:12pm | 05/08/11

      Chris L seems to have an aversion to the truth. I am sorry if the truth states that the left are a bunch of totalitarian twats. I mean, Mao, Stalin, Kim, Pol Pot, Idi Amin, Castro, and a host of others are clearly of the right, aren’t they?

      I hate to break it to lefties, but the truth doesn’t care for fairness or being balanced. It just is. So, appeals to fairness and balance shows nothing but your lack of understanding of truth (or science, but let’s not go there, eh?).

      This is where socialists fail. They think that EVERYTHING should be fair and balanced. Sorry, kiddos. The world doesn’t work that way. After all, I’d like to see a rabbit beat up and kill a human being, but the only time that has happened was in Monty Python. Time to move away from fantasy and face real life, children.

    • Chris L says:

      06:10pm | 05/08/11

      You have a lot of anger in you Andy. It’s good that you have found a way to vent that.

      I see you are a believer in guilt by association, citing Mao, Castro and the like. I was thinking people on your side of the divide might have been shying away from that practice since the incident in Norway, but I guess old habits die hard.

      Perhaps it’s true that GWB was a lot smarter than he appeared, but that doesn’t stop me from being disgusted by his instigation of invasion using lies about WMDs (a lie exposed by CIA director Tenet) and ordering torture to obtain false information rather than use the more successful FBI interrogation techniques that actually obtained the vast majority of usefull information. Let alone that the GFC hit at the end of his presidency, I’m sure you found a way to blame Obama for it.

      You go right ahead and spew vitriol at the left without regard for the accuracy of those statements (Obama has already drafted policies on health and foreign policy and no doubt others, though you say otherwise), and throw your temper tantrums at those who question Bush (really with all that frothing at the mouth perhaps you should spit, don’t worry about me you won’t even get close). Just let it all out, you’ll feel better.

    • Andy of Sydney says:

      03:47pm | 08/08/11

      Truth hurts, doesn’t it, Chris L? Tsk tsk tsk. Run along now. I am not fooled by your plaintitive cry of “guilt by association” or your “tar by the same brush” PCtarded nonsense.

      Not when Gillard and Brown wants to censor the internet and newspapers. Not when Gillard and Brown calls anyone who oppose their imbecility names that I won’t use in front of my mother. Not when I see vitriol spewed by the left (to the point that they cheer on a guy attacking an 80+ year old man!) day after day after day.

      If the shoe fits, wear it!

    • sam says:

      04:15pm | 01/08/11

      his a dud and king of debut

      Reply

    • stephen says:

      07:56pm | 01/08/11

      He lacks experience, the worldly sort, that’s true, but do not forget that he is a grauate of Harvard Law School and once taught Law at the University of Chicago.
      Law, though, is a language based discipline and when he was doing the Primaries a lot of other lawyers gave him a lot of money, thinking that in this digital age, a lawyer with contacts would have all the help he needs.
      But America is not really an information land ; true, Silicon Valley makes the stuff, but the US of A still values action over intent, and that is why they and us - for that matter - are suspicious of the Baroque and back-packer printmakers in Europe as subterfuge, i.e. they use the old and the new together and call it ‘new politics’.
      This may be America’s Dialectic : their agricultural practices should be smart - real smart - GE smart.
      Indeed, we should also rid ourselves of this stupid Wordsworthian symptom of nature as an untouchable ; that when we go to the country, it makes ue feel good as a cleanser.
      No.
      The farm is ours for the taking.
      We and the US need food for others.

    • bananabender says:

      08:52pm | 01/08/11

      stephen says:
      07:56pm | 01/08/11

      “He lacks experience, the worldly sort, that’s true, but do not forget that he is a graduate of Harvard Law School and once taught Law at the University of Chicago.”

      Obama’s legal career is essentially non-existent. He has never published a peer-reviewed academic paper and has only made a handful of appearances in lower courts.

      He got into Columbia and Harvard on Affirmative Action and has never released his academic transcripts.

      Reply

    • stephen says:

      09:23pm | 01/08/11

      Harry Truman has never released his either.
      I know Barack is not Oliver Wendell Holmes.

      But consider that after 9/11 and the Saudi ‘oil embargo’, (and they did indeed attempt a vicious retraction of supplies) then Obama has done a magnificent job of retracing America’s true steps.
      He is often indecisive. But he is making up his mind.
      There is a lot at stake, and he had a lot of problems to fix, and that is not to detract from G. W. Bush’s Presidency.
      (Actually, I’m surprized the US did not get a lot more angrier - a lot.)

    • bananabender says:

      09:57pm | 01/08/11

      Every other President since Nixon has released his academic transcript without protest.  If Obama was only 1/10th as brilliant as he pretends to be he would gladly do likewise. The only reason he doesn’t is because they would show he is a intellectual fraud who has rorted the Affirmative Action policies (just like his academically incompetent wife who also managed to get into Harvard).

    • marley says:

      09:15am | 02/08/11

      I don’t care what Obama’s school record was.  What I care about is his inexperience in politics (prior to the presidency, he was a rather obscure Senator with no executive experience) and his apparent lack of skill at consensus building.  By the nature of things, American Presidents have to be wheeler-dealers to get things done - and Obama doesn’t seem to have that particular skill set, unlike say Clinton or LBJ.

    • stephen says:

      10:35pm | 01/08/11

      He’s The President.
      And you are angry that he is there and have decided that intelligence, (or is it that you think blacks are liers ?) should decide a person’s faith in their job; but that is precisely what the Presidency or the Prime Ministership is : one of faith.
      Not theirs, ours.
      We have decided that they are only like us and they will decide things for us and they will look after us when we get angry or hungry or we are at war ; us, not geniuses, or supermen, or hermits.
      The moderate and the social.
      I don’t care if any of my representatives are especially smart or confounded by colours, (so long as they were voted in, that is) but if they are conscionable and not liers, then they can have that Lodge.

      Reply
 
Comment

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Paul Colgan

Colgo 25 May 12 10:37PM

Greece makes the final and Ireland gets in on a golden ticket. How awkward and embarrassing. Love it. #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 25 May 12 10:00PM

Every single #eurovision band is roxette #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 25 May 12 09:58PM

The weird thing about #eurovision is you've got this massive collection of dorks in a room and no one is wearing Spock ears #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 25 May 12 09:52PM

Europe has the large hadron collider which is light years ahead of its time and #eurovision, where the eighties never die

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Eurovision can’t drown out the human rights abuses

by Claire Mallinson

14

Eurovision can’t drown out the human rights abuses

Last year, thousands of Azerbaijanis spontaneously took to the streets of Baku shouting and chanting.…

Revenge. It doesn’t get a whole lot better than this

by The Punch Team

50

Revenge. It doesn’t get a whole lot better than this

Last month, Katy McCaffrey boarded the Disney Wonder cruiseliner. At some point during the trip, a sneaky…

Friday dilemma: can school bullies grow out of it?

by Tory Maguire

121

Friday dilemma: can school bullies grow out of it?

ClubsNSW is set to introduce a fresh new effort to combat schoolyard intimidation, insisting on a principal’s…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Light weight

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter

Subscribe to The Punch RSS feed