This pretty well sums it up:
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10...reno64-wsj
Highlights:
"Often, members of the Obama administration speak and, worse, think and act, like a bunch of teenagers."
"...NSC spokesman, Thomas Vietor, responding .. to a question ... about the deaths of an American ambassador and three other Americans with the line, "Dude, this was like two years ago.""
"When administration members find themselves judged not on utopian aspirations or the purity of their motives—from offering "hope and change" to stopping global warming—but on their actual accomplishments, they turn sulky. As teenagers will, they throw a few taunts (the president last month said the GOP was offering economic policies that amount to a "stinkburger" or a "meanwich") and stomp off, refusing to exchange a civil word with those of opposing views."
"If the United States today looks weak, hesitant and in retreat, it is in part because its leaders and their staff do not carry themselves like adults. They may be charming, bright and attractive; they may have the best of intentions; but they do not look serious. They act as though Twitter and clenched teeth or a pout could stop invasions or rescue kidnapped children in Nigeria."
"...despite solemn deals and red lines—the administration ignores it, hoping, as teenagers often do, that if they do not acknowledge a screw-up no one else will notice."
While the Obama administration's twitter stuff is, in my opinion, silly, their plan is quite simple and effective.
The Obama administration is doing what Republicans refuse to do, and that is communicate and get younger people involved through social media. Because of this, younger people will be much more likely to vote for the party that communicates with them, and that's the Democratic Party.
Yeah I am with math on this one. you can't blame an administration for taking advantage of social media. it's the smart thing to do and anyone who is not is missing out on a huge asset and anyone trying to criticize it is a damn fool.
Let them ridicule while they keep losing national elections.
Social media helped Obama get elected. If the republicans don't get on board, they aren't going to do very well.
(05-13-2014 09:35 AM)Fitbud Wrote: [ -> ]Social media helped Obama get elected. If the republicans don't get on board, they aren't going to do very well.
One more case of stupid party versus evil party.
Communicating with adolescents and immature adults to get elected, seems like a pretty poor strategy when dealing with the real world.
But Dude, you know, like that may be styll may be the way to reach your mains.
(05-13-2014 08:38 AM)john01992 Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah I am with math on this one. you can't blame an administration for taking advantage of social media. it's the smart thing to do and anyone who is not is missing out on a huge asset and anyone trying to criticize it is a damn fool.
Criticizing this administration for acting like immature kids, or adolescents to get elected doesn't make anybody a fool. To support it makes you a fool. Think about it. While it might be smart to use kids this way, it's not smart to lead the country this way. It wreaks of failure.
I'm far more concerned with national issues and problems than I am concerned in reaching out via social media. That's not the important thing here.
(05-13-2014 09:48 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2014 08:38 AM)john01992 Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah I am with math on this one. you can't blame an administration for taking advantage of social media. it's the smart thing to do and anyone who is not is missing out on a huge asset and anyone trying to criticize it is a damn fool.
Criticizing this administration for acting like immature kids, or adolescents to get elected doesn't make anybody a fool. To support it makes you a fool. Think about it. While it might be smart to use kids this way, it's not smart to lead the country this way. It wreaks of failure.
I'm far more concerned with national issues and problems than I am concerned in reaching out via social media. That's not the important thing here.
The Benghazi withchunt sure is trying to tackle economical issues, for sure.
(05-13-2014 09:49 AM)mathenis89 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2014 09:48 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2014 08:38 AM)john01992 Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah I am with math on this one. you can't blame an administration for taking advantage of social media. it's the smart thing to do and anyone who is not is missing out on a huge asset and anyone trying to criticize it is a damn fool.
Criticizing this administration for acting like immature kids, or adolescents to get elected doesn't make anybody a fool. To support it makes you a fool. Think about it. While it might be smart to use kids this way, it's not smart to lead the country this way. It wreaks of failure.
I'm far more concerned with national issues and problems than I am concerned in reaching out via social media. That's not the important thing here.
The Benghazi withchunt sure is trying to tackle economical issues, for sure.
You're just a kid yourself, I'm not getting into this with you. I already know where you stand.
(05-13-2014 09:52 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2014 09:49 AM)mathenis89 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2014 09:48 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2014 08:38 AM)john01992 Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah I am with math on this one. you can't blame an administration for taking advantage of social media. it's the smart thing to do and anyone who is not is missing out on a huge asset and anyone trying to criticize it is a damn fool.
Criticizing this administration for acting like immature kids, or adolescents to get elected doesn't make anybody a fool. To support it makes you a fool. Think about it. While it might be smart to use kids this way, it's not smart to lead the country this way. It wreaks of failure.
I'm far more concerned with national issues and problems than I am concerned in reaching out via social media. That's not the important thing here.
The Benghazi withchunt sure is trying to tackle economical issues, for sure.
You're just a kid yourself, I'm not getting into this with you. I already know where you stand.
How is the Benghazi witchhunt helping the middle class and lower class?
How is it helping the economy? How is it getting us jobs?
Oh, that's right. Since Obama was elected, the Republican Party's only goal was to get Obama out of office, rather than help the american people.
Even Boehner said that was the #1 priority.
(05-13-2014 09:38 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2014 09:35 AM)Fitbud Wrote: [ -> ]Social media helped Obama get elected. If the republicans don't get on board, they aren't going to do very well.
One more case of stupid party versus evil party.
One sure sign that you are getting old is when you begin to think that the younger generations aren't as smart as you are.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
What was the last political party whose #1 goal was not to get the other party out of power?
And if you believe that Obama is 100% bad for the American people, how is getting him out of power, or opposing him while in power, different from helping the American people?
(05-13-2014 09:55 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: [ -> ]What was the last political party whose #1 goal was not to get the other party out of power?
And if you believe that Obama is 100% bad for the American people, how is getting him out of power, or opposing him while in power, different from helping the American people?
Probably Thomas Jefferson vs. John Adams.
(05-13-2014 09:53 AM)mathenis89 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2014 09:52 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2014 09:49 AM)mathenis89 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2014 09:48 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2014 08:38 AM)john01992 Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah I am with math on this one. you can't blame an administration for taking advantage of social media. it's the smart thing to do and anyone who is not is missing out on a huge asset and anyone trying to criticize it is a damn fool.
Criticizing this administration for acting like immature kids, or adolescents to get elected doesn't make anybody a fool. To support it makes you a fool. Think about it. While it might be smart to use kids this way, it's not smart to lead the country this way. It wreaks of failure.
I'm far more concerned with national issues and problems than I am concerned in reaching out via social media. That's not the important thing here.
The Benghazi withchunt sure is trying to tackle economical issues, for sure.
You're just a kid yourself, I'm not getting into this with you. I already know where you stand.
How is the Benghazi witchhunt helping the middle class and lower class?
How is it helping the economy? How is it getting us jobs?
Oh, that's right. Since Obama was elected, the Republican Party's only goal was to get Obama out of office, rather than help the american people.
Even Boehner said that was the #1 priority.
You see, this is exactly what I'm talking about. It doesn't take an entire administration to stop and drop everything and run to the Benghazi exposure. You obviously don't understand what multitasking is. Instead of being concerned about possible corruption by the party you voted for, you'd rather write it off just so obama doesn't look bad. At what point do you guys begin to think about things outside of the box? That this administration could be corrupt? Didn't ring a bell that they can't answer questions?
Red flags everywhere and your next candidate clearly said "What difference does it make" about our own people losing their lives. If they had nothing to do with this, they'd actually be compassionate and emotional. I thought Michelle Obama was going to fall over and die in the picture she took with a sign that said "bring our girls back" about some kidnapped girls in a different country. About the American lives in Benghazi, though, nothing.
(05-13-2014 10:07 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2014 09:53 AM)mathenis89 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2014 09:52 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2014 09:49 AM)mathenis89 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2014 09:48 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote: [ -> ]Criticizing this administration for acting like immature kids, or adolescents to get elected doesn't make anybody a fool. To support it makes you a fool. Think about it. While it might be smart to use kids this way, it's not smart to lead the country this way. It wreaks of failure.
I'm far more concerned with national issues and problems than I am concerned in reaching out via social media. That's not the important thing here.
The Benghazi withchunt sure is trying to tackle economical issues, for sure.
You're just a kid yourself, I'm not getting into this with you. I already know where you stand.
How is the Benghazi witchhunt helping the middle class and lower class?
How is it helping the economy? How is it getting us jobs?
Oh, that's right. Since Obama was elected, the Republican Party's only goal was to get Obama out of office, rather than help the american people.
Even Boehner said that was the #1 priority.
You see, this is exactly what I'm talking about. It doesn't take an entire administration to stop and drop everything and run to the Benghazi exposure. You obviously don't understand what multitasking is. Instead of being concerned about possible corruption by the party you voted for, you'd rather write it off just so obama doesn't look bad. At what point do you guys begin to think about things outside of the box? That this administration could be corrupt? Didn't ring a bell that they can't answer questions?
Red flags everywhere and your next candidate clearly said "What difference does it make" about our own people losing their lives. If they had nothing to do with this, they'd actually be compassionate and emotional. I thought Michelle Obama was going to fall over and die in the picture she took with a sign that said "bring our girls back" about some kidnapped girls in a different country. About the American lives in Benghazi, though, nothing.
I'm not talking about the Administration. I'm talking about the Republican Party.
What has the Republican Party done to help the lower and middle classes?
(05-13-2014 10:07 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2014 09:53 AM)mathenis89 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2014 09:52 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2014 09:49 AM)mathenis89 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2014 09:48 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote: [ -> ]Criticizing this administration for acting like immature kids, or adolescents to get elected doesn't make anybody a fool. To support it makes you a fool. Think about it. While it might be smart to use kids this way, it's not smart to lead the country this way. It wreaks of failure.
I'm far more concerned with national issues and problems than I am concerned in reaching out via social media. That's not the important thing here.
The Benghazi withchunt sure is trying to tackle economical issues, for sure.
You're just a kid yourself, I'm not getting into this with you. I already know where you stand.
How is the Benghazi witchhunt helping the middle class and lower class?
How is it helping the economy? How is it getting us jobs?
Oh, that's right. Since Obama was elected, the Republican Party's only goal was to get Obama out of office, rather than help the american people.
Even Boehner said that was the #1 priority.
You see, this is exactly what I'm talking about. It doesn't take an entire administration to stop and drop everything and run to the Benghazi exposure. You obviously don't understand what multitasking is. Instead of being concerned about possible corruption by the party you voted for, you'd rather write it off just so obama doesn't look bad. At what point do you guys begin to think about things outside of the box? That this administration could be corrupt? Didn't ring a bell that they can't answer questions?
Red flags everywhere and your next candidate clearly said "What difference does it make" about our own people losing their lives. If they had nothing to do with this, they'd actually be compassionate and emotional. I thought Michelle Obama was going to fall over and die in the picture she took with a sign that said "bring our girls back" about some kidnapped girls in a different country. About the American lives in Benghazi, though, nothing.
I understand what you are saying but it still doesn't help the economy.
(05-13-2014 10:10 AM)Fitbud Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2014 10:07 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2014 09:53 AM)mathenis89 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2014 09:52 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2014 09:49 AM)mathenis89 Wrote: [ -> ]The Benghazi withchunt sure is trying to tackle economical issues, for sure.
You're just a kid yourself, I'm not getting into this with you. I already know where you stand.
How is the Benghazi witchhunt helping the middle class and lower class?
How is it helping the economy? How is it getting us jobs?
Oh, that's right. Since Obama was elected, the Republican Party's only goal was to get Obama out of office, rather than help the american people.
Even Boehner said that was the #1 priority.
You see, this is exactly what I'm talking about. It doesn't take an entire administration to stop and drop everything and run to the Benghazi exposure. You obviously don't understand what multitasking is. Instead of being concerned about possible corruption by the party you voted for, you'd rather write it off just so obama doesn't look bad. At what point do you guys begin to think about things outside of the box? That this administration could be corrupt? Didn't ring a bell that they can't answer questions?
Red flags everywhere and your next candidate clearly said "What difference does it make" about our own people losing their lives. If they had nothing to do with this, they'd actually be compassionate and emotional. I thought Michelle Obama was going to fall over and die in the picture she took with a sign that said "bring our girls back" about some kidnapped girls in a different country. About the American lives in Benghazi, though, nothing.
I understand what you are saying but it still doesn't help the economy.
Why, all of the sudden, is the economy FINALLY the focus?
(05-13-2014 10:32 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2014 10:10 AM)Fitbud Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2014 10:07 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2014 09:53 AM)mathenis89 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2014 09:52 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote: [ -> ]You're just a kid yourself, I'm not getting into this with you. I already know where you stand.
How is the Benghazi witchhunt helping the middle class and lower class?
How is it helping the economy? How is it getting us jobs?
Oh, that's right. Since Obama was elected, the Republican Party's only goal was to get Obama out of office, rather than help the american people.
Even Boehner said that was the #1 priority.
You see, this is exactly what I'm talking about. It doesn't take an entire administration to stop and drop everything and run to the Benghazi exposure. You obviously don't understand what multitasking is. Instead of being concerned about possible corruption by the party you voted for, you'd rather write it off just so obama doesn't look bad. At what point do you guys begin to think about things outside of the box? That this administration could be corrupt? Didn't ring a bell that they can't answer questions?
Red flags everywhere and your next candidate clearly said "What difference does it make" about our own people losing their lives. If they had nothing to do with this, they'd actually be compassionate and emotional. I thought Michelle Obama was going to fall over and die in the picture she took with a sign that said "bring our girls back" about some kidnapped girls in a different country. About the American lives in Benghazi, though, nothing.
I understand what you are saying but it still doesn't help the economy.
Why, all of the sudden, is the economy FINALLY the focus?
So comrade 0bama can ramp up another "summer of recovery" propaganda campaign and the masses will forget about his crimes.
(05-13-2014 09:57 AM)Fitbud Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2014 09:55 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: [ -> ]What was the last political party whose #1 goal was not to get the other party out of power?
And if you believe that Obama is 100% bad for the American people, how is getting him out of power, or opposing him while in power, different from helping the American people?
Probably Thomas Jefferson vs. John Adams.
1800 was first truly nasty presidential election, and signaled the birth of faction -- later to become political parties. In fact, if it wasn't for the election of 1828, where Andrew Jackson's political enemies called his wife a whore (back when being called a whore was the end of the world), it would probably have been the nastiest election ever.
Rachel Jackson died immediately after her husband was elected. He always blamed his political enemies for killing her.