Does Obama do anything else besides give speeches?

[Anonymous]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/01/AR2010070100388.html?hpid=topnews

He has achieved zilch in his first term, but I guess that's also "Bush's fault".

[Anonymous]

No. He only talks. Next question?

[Anonymous]

I'm quite satisifed with the quiet way the Obama administration has been getting things done, actually. Maybe you missed this?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/21/AR2010062104709.html?hpid=topnews

[Anonymous]

Nope!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No. He only talks. Next question?

I just listened to his speech at AMerican University on immigration reform--platitudes, same old rhetoric, and uninspiring. It appears that the sound of his own voice is his favorite noise. I know it takes time for changes to be implemented but I honestly can't see anything that Obama has done to change things. Health care--he still caved to republicans and insurance companies. Unfortunately, our manner in which presidential candidates are chosen are seriously flawed. Frankly, I'd rather go back to the smoked-filled back rooms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No. He only talks. Next question?

But, somehow, while doing nothing, he is turning us into a socialist dictatorship, right?

He's done some good things, some bad things, and has failed to act on some things. There are grounds for both sides to debate, so why waste time on fatuous oversimplification?

[Anonymous]

He's enchanted by soaring concepts; the nitty gritty of daily governance seems to elude him. That's why he always seems to shift into blame of the past, or policy hopes for the future in his speeches. What we can do here and now does not seem to hold his interest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. He only talks. Next question?

But, somehow, while doing nothing, he is turning us into a socialist dictatorship, right?

He's done some good things, some bad things, and has failed to act on some things. There are grounds for both sides to debate, so why waste time on fatuous oversimplification?

Comment of the day! Conservatives want to bash Obama for turning America into a socialist dictatorship yet also decry him for doing nothing. Which is it? Is he sitting on his hands? Or is he masterminding the transformation of the USA into the United Muslim States of Kenya? Can't have it both ways. Oh wait, they're conservatives... of COURSE they can be hypocritical without consequence.

(Note: Conservatives do not have a monopoly on hypocrisy... liberals own their fair share as well... but we should still point it out when it presents itself, as it does here.)

[Anonymous]

The Obama Administration hasn't been provided with the kind of large-scale disaster that would allow it to grab up all kinds of unconstitutional power to "get things done", while getting a pass for ignoring all the other things that need to get done. No, it's stuck dealing with boring, slow-moving policy crap that people only pay attention to when they are personally affected, and at the level of a convenient Fox News soundbite to parrot.

[Anonymous]

UM, the oil spill is certainly a large scale disaster where the administration could show its desire to get things done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I just listened to his speech at AMerican University on immigration reform--platitudes, same old rhetoric, and uninspiring.

This is how grownups talk. They lay out the issues. They establish a general position. They discuss competing priorities and viewpoints. They, ones hopes, come to agreement on a desired goal. Only then do they begin to plot the route to that goal. Sorry the speech wasn't cowboy enough for you. But sometimes, it really is a tad more complicated than "you're with us or you're against us".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:UM, the oil spill is certainly a large scale disaster where the administration could show its desire to get things done.

Ah. So you're envisioning a Patriot Act style bill which would seize BP's assets and send its executives to Guantanamo, call troops home from the wars overseas to clean up the beaches, impose penalties on over-consumers of fossil fuels, and investigate anyone who so much as googles "Chevy Tahoe".

What kind of support do you think a bill like that might get in Congress?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He's enchanted by soaring concepts; the nitty gritty of daily governance seems to elude him. That's why he always seems to shift into blame of the past, or policy hopes for the future in his speeches. What we can do here and now does not seem to hold his interest.

Really? I completely disagree. He got some version of Health Care passed, which was VERY hard to do. He obviously had to make a lot of compromises to get it done, and a lot of liberals aren't happy with the result, but the framework has now been set.

I think he is very very pragmatic. Not idealistic at all.

Same with the FMLA and gay rights stuff. No it's not as comprehensive as many liberals and gay advocates wanted, but it is meaningful change and a move in I think the right direction. Small steps, nothing big and showy, nothing that REpublicans could get too up in arms about. No big speeches about how Gays are people too, and deservce civil rights and the right to get married. But changing the wording in some law to say that you can take time off not just for your biological child or your adopted child's needs, but for a child for whome you are actin in locl parentis. Stuff like this seems small and doesn't make it into soaring speeches but it will make a great difference in real people's lives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UM, the oil spill is certainly a large scale disaster where the administration could show its desire to get things done.

Ah. So you're envisioning a Patriot Act style bill which would seize BP's assets and send its executives to Guantanamo, call troops home from the wars overseas to clean up the beaches, impose penalties on over-consumers of fossil fuels, and investigate anyone who so much as googles "Chevy Tahoe".

What kind of support do you think a bill like that might get in Congress?

YES! And, if anyone protests this, they are "Unamerican" and will be put on No-Fly lists because of suspected terrorism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UM, the oil spill is certainly a large scale disaster where the administration could show its desire to get things done.

Ah. So you're envisioning a Patriot Act style bill which would seize BP's assets and send its executives to Guantanamo, call troops home from the wars overseas to clean up the beaches, impose penalties on over-consumers of fossil fuels, and investigate anyone who so much as googles "Chevy Tahoe".

What kind of support do you think a bill like that might get in Congress?

YES! And, if anyone protests this, they are "Unamerican" and will be put on No-Fly lists because of suspected terrorism.

Not really; I think people would be pretty happy and see him as 'decisive' if he just freed some skimmers