Quote:
Originally Posted by BFT3K
If you consider Bush "a leader" then I applaud Obama's leaderlessness, for disappointing you.
|
Just because someone IS a leader doesn't mean that they led us the right way. Hitler was a GREAT leader. But the things he led people to were horrific.
Get your head straight and realize what I am saying. Obama doesn't have the ability to get others to follow. It's just that simple. He himself is a follower. He's never been in "command" of anything until he became President.
And the results speak for themselves:
Reagan was able to get the Dem controlled Senate and House to work with him even though they HATED his guts.
Clinton was able to get the Republican Senate and House to work with him even though they HATED him so bad they threw his friends in jail, had him disbarred, and IMPEACHED him.
Bush was able to get the Democrats to work with him even though they bitterly HATED his fucking guts worse than any President in recent history.
That is what LEADERSHIP is about.
You can't quip about how you'll take Obama's inability to lead over Bush's leadership in one breath...and then complain about it and blame the minority party in the next.
You can't have it both ways.
Obama sucks as a President. He's an awesome campaigner. Might have even been a good Senator. But just horrible in the executive position.
But you are so hypnotized by your party affiliation that you can't even see that weakness in him.
To you, he seems to be damn near flawless. It's always somebody else's fault for every fuck up he makes.
That is the mistake I think you are making.
Even Bill Maher says all the time: "Remember, he's the President. Not your boyfriend"