So what does that mean? When the public opinion agrees with your point
of view on an issue the public is brilliant and can be counted on for
its insightful choices. But when the public disagrees with your view
it's because they are a bunch of ignorant fools. At least I'm
consistent. I have little confidence in the public's wisdom. My
experience tells me they don't have any. They voted George W. Bush for
president, twice. I don't think any more proof of their stupidity than
that is required.

Hawke

It doesn't mean a damned thing. My intent was a playful tweak. I
thought you'd take it as such, and perhaps you do. Life is far too
short to be taken seriously.

I didn't take it all that seriously.


Obama was the least bad choice in the last election. Bush was such an
embarrasment that Jack the Ripper could have won that election if
running as a democrat. Meanwhile, patriot veteran McCain was
obviously a GOP party hack and I'm amazed that nice-legs Palin has
ever had any support from anywhere. I did learn in corporate America
to never underestimate the power of T&A.

I also agree that the last election was not really much of a choice.
After such bungling by Bush, only a few nutty types would vote to put
republicans in charge of anything. The question is when a president does
an average job will the election always be a close one? And as far as
T&A goes I give it a high rating. It's one of those things where you can
say at least it's not going to hurt.


That said: Obama has ****ed off a lot of the citizenry, including some
former supporters of hope and change. Post election, he clearly places
his agendae over what the public thinks, based on current ratings.

I think that is what you call leadership. Anyone can ask the public what
to do and then follow their instructions. A leader tells people what his
plan is, asks to be elected, and if he is elected then proceeds to put
his plan into effect. From my perspective that is what Obama is doing.
He's leading. But that doesn't mean he'll be popular. After all, the
public is unrealistic. They want an end to our problems immediately and
it hasn't happened so they blame Obama. Rome wasn't built in a day. But
the public wants things to be good again and don't have any patience.
What a surprise, huh?


Is he right or wrong? TBD. Election is a popularity contest,
leadership sometimes requires becoming unpopular.

Exactly. You judge the man on his time in office not on each individual
problem he faces. After four years we can decide if Obama did things
right or not. It takes a couple of years to get things changed from the
last administration and then the next two years you see how the changes
worked.

We elected him, so he's El Jefe until 2012.

To your point, Hawke: Hope is never a strategy, but the
mostly-ignorant, gullible and greedy electorate have spake.

Anybody that has hope as their strategy shouldn't be in the planning
business. But everyone, no matter what their position, always has hope
that what they are trying to do will succeed. Obama is no different. The
thing is that only some of us hope Obama will be successful. A lot of
Americans want him to fail so they can get power for their side. People
like that I have no respect for.


We may actually be in violent agreement.

That's a possibility. Time will tell.

Hawke