Even CNN Has Its Moments

As further proof that the former Democratic hegemony is in serious trouble, cornpone pundit James Carville provided a little excitement on CNN by announcing that it is time for His Majesty Obama to panic. After two major losses in special House elections, Carville mused "What should the White House do now? Panic." This came after the Democrats lost a New York seat it has held since 1923 and a Nevada loss by an unexpectedly big margin.

The New York loss was a big hint that Democrats in general and Obama in particular are in trouble. The Nevada loss appears to indicate that the general dissatisfaction with both political parties is working more against the Democrats than against the Republicans. Carville is a tried and true Democratic stalwart, but even he has decided that the real problem is Obama, not the Democratic Party. Fellow Democratic pundit Cornell Belcher said that even with his terrible poll numbers, Obama gets higher ratings than Congress. Carville shot back: "But they keep electing Republicans."

Belcher, still basking in the glow of the 2008 Obama victory, attempted to defend his beloved President. He called Obama's woes a messaging problem. The President still walks on water, but his staff is not helping him to get his message out. Carville snarled: "Then fire the communications staff. Communications people are a dime a dozen." Carville went on to point out that Obama is hesitant to fire anyone (including avowed communists like Van Jones). "Bill Clinton fired many people in 1994 (after the Republicans took the House in a landslide) and took a lot of heat for it."

"Reagan fired most of his campaign staff in 1980. Republicans historically fired their own speaker, Newt Gingrich, Bush fired Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. For God's sake, why are we still looking at the same political and economic advisers that got us into this mess?" Carville is big on firing, apparently. He was probably partially responsible for the Clinton firings he referred to. Keep the baby, throw out the bathwater. Not a bad suggestion, but it's unlikely that the bland, not-very-executive Chief Executive will follow it.

Carville cited the Solyndra scandal, the seemingly-permanent unemployment numbers, and the two special elections as proof that the President is "surrounded by morons." There are those who think the reason for that is that a dullard is always likely to surround himself with morons so he can be the smartest guy in the gang. Carville didn't go quite that far, but he got close. And this was before leaks began to get out about administration officials attempting to alter the testimony of a four-star general who says that a broadband scheme put together by Obama loyalists would endanger national security.

The lizard-like Carville can be annoying, but his homespun cracker practicality can also be amusing. It seems likely to me that he thinks that his choice, Hillary Clinton, would not have allowed herself to get into this position. And even if she had, she would have had her husband's record of firings to guide her.

Carville is no conservative by any means, but he does seem incapable of understanding Obama's true nature. Bill Clinton was a liberal, but practical politician. Obama sees practicality as selling out his doctrinaire leftist beliefs. Clinton could see when his wishes were not going to be achieved, so he maneuvered to get what he could. Obama has no sense of his own inability to get his agenda passed in toto, so he blames his predecessor and the Republicans for stalemate.

Clinton got rid of his deadwood. Obama believes he is incapable of error, and that includes his choice of staff. He is a doctrinaire social welfare egalitarian, so it's no surprise that he's not about to fire those who are in total agreement with him. In fact, he sees them as his "Immortals" who will help him march to another victory in 2012 against those pesky Republican Spartans and their Greek allies. Carville is right about firing most of Obama's staff. But he's wrong in believing that a muddle-headed pseudo-academic leftist President like Obama can make that decision or go it alone. Obama is helpless without his acolytes.

Even CNN Has Its Moments

Category : LawHawkRFD

As further proof that the former Democratic hegemony is in serious trouble, cornpone pundit James Carville provided a little excitement on CNN by announcing that it is time for His Majesty Obama to panic. After two major losses in special House elections, Carville mused "What should the White House do now? Panic." This came after the Democrats lost a New York seat it has held since 1923 and a Nevada loss by an unexpectedly big margin.

The New York loss was a big hint that Democrats in general and Obama in particular are in trouble. The Nevada loss appears to indicate that the general dissatisfaction with both political parties is working more against the Democrats than against the Republicans. Carville is a tried and true Democratic stalwart, but even he has decided that the real problem is Obama, not the Democratic Party. Fellow Democratic pundit Cornell Belcher said that even with his terrible poll numbers, Obama gets higher ratings than Congress. Carville shot back: "But they keep electing Republicans."

Belcher, still basking in the glow of the 2008 Obama victory, attempted to defend his beloved President. He called Obama's woes a messaging problem. The President still walks on water, but his staff is not helping him to get his message out. Carville snarled: "Then fire the communications staff. Communications people are a dime a dozen." Carville went on to point out that Obama is hesitant to fire anyone (including avowed communists like Van Jones). "Bill Clinton fired many people in 1994 (after the Republicans took the House in a landslide) and took a lot of heat for it."

"Reagan fired most of his campaign staff in 1980. Republicans historically fired their own speaker, Newt Gingrich, Bush fired Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. For God's sake, why are we still looking at the same political and economic advisers that got us into this mess?" Carville is big on firing, apparently. He was probably partially responsible for the Clinton firings he referred to. Keep the baby, throw out the bathwater. Not a bad suggestion, but it's unlikely that the bland, not-very-executive Chief Executive will follow it.

Carville cited the Solyndra scandal, the seemingly-permanent unemployment numbers, and the two special elections as proof that the President is "surrounded by morons." There are those who think the reason for that is that a dullard is always likely to surround himself with morons so he can be the smartest guy in the gang. Carville didn't go quite that far, but he got close. And this was before leaks began to get out about administration officials attempting to alter the testimony of a four-star general who says that a broadband scheme put together by Obama loyalists would endanger national security.

The lizard-like Carville can be annoying, but his homespun cracker practicality can also be amusing. It seems likely to me that he thinks that his choice, Hillary Clinton, would not have allowed herself to get into this position. And even if she had, she would have had her husband's record of firings to guide her.

Carville is no conservative by any means, but he does seem incapable of understanding Obama's true nature. Bill Clinton was a liberal, but practical politician. Obama sees practicality as selling out his doctrinaire leftist beliefs. Clinton could see when his wishes were not going to be achieved, so he maneuvered to get what he could. Obama has no sense of his own inability to get his agenda passed in toto, so he blames his predecessor and the Republicans for stalemate.

Clinton got rid of his deadwood. Obama believes he is incapable of error, and that includes his choice of staff. He is a doctrinaire social welfare egalitarian, so it's no surprise that he's not about to fire those who are in total agreement with him. In fact, he sees them as his "Immortals" who will help him march to another victory in 2012 against those pesky Republican Spartans and their Greek allies. Carville is right about firing most of Obama's staff. But he's wrong in believing that a muddle-headed pseudo-academic leftist President like Obama can make that decision or go it alone. Obama is helpless without his acolytes.
"This Best Selling Tends to SELL OUT VERY FAST! If this is a MUST HAVE product, be sure to Order Now to avoid disappointment!"

Best Beyblade Ever - Austerity

Best Beyblade Ever Amazon Product, Find and Compare Prices Online.

As further proof that the former Democratic hegemony is in serious trouble, cornpone pundit James Carville provided a little excitement on CNN by announcing that it is time for His Majesty Obama to panic. After two major losses in special House elections, Carville mused "What should the White House do now? Panic." This came after the Democrats lost a New York seat it has held since 1923 and a Nevada loss by an unexpectedly big margin.

The New York loss was a big hint that Democrats in general and Obama in particular are in trouble. The Nevada loss appears to indicate that the general dissatisfaction with both political parties is working more against the Democrats than against the Republicans. Carville is a tried and true Democratic stalwart, but even he has decided that the real problem is Obama, not the Democratic Party. Fellow Democratic pundit Cornell Belcher said that even with his terrible poll numbers, Obama gets higher ratings than Congress. Carville shot back: "But they keep electing Republicans."

Belcher, still basking in the glow of the 2008 Obama victory, attempted to defend his beloved President. He called Obama's woes a messaging problem. The President still walks on water, but his staff is not helping him to get his message out. Carville snarled: "Then fire the communications staff. Communications people are a dime a dozen." Carville went on to point out that Obama is hesitant to fire anyone (including avowed communists like Van Jones). "Bill Clinton fired many people in 1994 (after the Republicans took the House in a landslide) and took a lot of heat for it."

"Reagan fired most of his campaign staff in 1980. Republicans historically fired their own speaker, Newt Gingrich, Bush fired Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. For God's sake, why are we still looking at the same political and economic advisers that got us into this mess?" Carville is big on firing, apparently. He was probably partially responsible for the Clinton firings he referred to. Keep the baby, throw out the bathwater. Not a bad suggestion, but it's unlikely that the bland, not-very-executive Chief Executive will follow it.

Carville cited the Solyndra scandal, the seemingly-permanent unemployment numbers, and the two special elections as proof that the President is "surrounded by morons." There are those who think the reason for that is that a dullard is always likely to surround himself with morons so he can be the smartest guy in the gang. Carville didn't go quite that far, but he got close. And this was before leaks began to get out about administration officials attempting to alter the testimony of a four-star general who says that a broadband scheme put together by Obama loyalists would endanger national security.

The lizard-like Carville can be annoying, but his homespun cracker practicality can also be amusing. It seems likely to me that he thinks that his choice, Hillary Clinton, would not have allowed herself to get into this position. And even if she had, she would have had her husband's record of firings to guide her.

Carville is no conservative by any means, but he does seem incapable of understanding Obama's true nature. Bill Clinton was a liberal, but practical politician. Obama sees practicality as selling out his doctrinaire leftist beliefs. Clinton could see when his wishes were not going to be achieved, so he maneuvered to get what he could. Obama has no sense of his own inability to get his agenda passed in toto, so he blames his predecessor and the Republicans for stalemate.

Clinton got rid of his deadwood. Obama believes he is incapable of error, and that includes his choice of staff. He is a doctrinaire social welfare egalitarian, so it's no surprise that he's not about to fire those who are in total agreement with him. In fact, he sees them as his "Immortals" who will help him march to another victory in 2012 against those pesky Republican Spartans and their Greek allies. Carville is right about firing most of Obama's staff. But he's wrong in believing that a muddle-headed pseudo-academic leftist President like Obama can make that decision or go it alone. Obama is helpless without his acolytes.

Product Title : Even CNN Has Its Moments

Even CNN Has Its Moments,

LawHawkRFD,

Even CNN Has Its Moments