The answer to every question about President Obama is, look at his cabinet,

[ej510]

and his former Chief of Staff. Seriously it is self-explanatory. It answers the question whether he is playing chess or is he dumb. He isn't playing chess and he isn't anywhere close to dumb.

[ej510]

1. Even his current Chief of Staff.

[Solomon]

2. Yeah he's evil, unsincere, deceitful and dishonest.

:sarcasm:

[ej510]

3. Possibly, but I would just say he is pro corporate America like President

Clinton was.

[gateley]

4. But I still honestly believe he has the same values so many of us

do. He may be pro corporate, but that doesn't explain why he would agree to things that will actually hurt people.

I understand (or it's my belief) that he felt he was doing the best for the most people on health care, for example, and the giveaways to Pharma were what it took to get the deal done. He MAY feel that allowing the country to default will hurt more people than the RUMORED 'adjustments' to SS/Medicare. I just don't know - but in both instances, and others, I think he could have gotten more without giving up so much.

I just don't understand him at times. :(

[ej510]

5. After getting fucked over time and time again, it is time for people to wake up.

President Obama cares about being re-elected and if the American people are hurt, oh well. Like Bill CLinton he is setting himself up to make millions after his Presidency is over.

[gateley]

8. But that's one of the most perplexing aspects of this situation --

if they touch SS/Medicare, people won't tolerate it. And it will reflect on the Republicans, too -- it's a no-win for all of them so I don't understand why touching them are even a consideration.

[ej510]

9. The republicans want Obama to guy Medicare and Social Security.

Remember the DLC, New Democrat, and Third Way Dems support privatizing Social Security.

[gateley]

14. And Bush's ratings tanked when he was pushing privatizing SS,

so again, I can't help but think this doesn't benefit either the Dems or Reps. Recipients will lash out and that anger will get them to vote against those who supported any cuts. That's what I foresee happening, anyway. Look at what happened in 2010.

[tavalon]

12. Actually, it will hurt both parties but it will sink this one

and the Republicans can hide behind his coattails. They have checkmated him in a game he should never have even played.

[gateley]

17. Sigh. I think you're right. It makes me so sad. nt

[tavalon]

22. Yeah, we coulda been contenders

[flamingdem]

6. I think you're basically right! As the "adult" he cannot allow default

or the 14th amendment as somewhat less adult, but more ballsy Clinton would have done.

[tavalon]

11. President Carter was not a good President

and yet he's damn near the best human being walking the earth these days. He was not well suited to the job of President. And neither is Obama. I think his personal values have been subsumed by a job that he isn't good at. And that must be a hell of an ego hit, because he's always been great at everything he did. But he is out of his league as President. So was Herbert Hoover and a half dozen other poor Presidents that don't come to mind right now.

[pnorman]

7. Also, There's Not A Dime's Worth Of Difference Between......

n/t

[tavalon]

10. He is an oligarch in service to other oligarchs

He's Republican light or what used to be Republican before they became batshit crazy.

[bigwillq]

13. Like GWB, I think Obama

surrounded himself by bad people, at least in my opinion.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

15. Yes, his advisors and cabinet -

say everything about him. He is not dumb, he is not spineless, he is asking for and getting exactly what he wants.

It's all here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1540315

[ej510]

16. This is how I see it. There is a saying, Who you surround yourself with

speaks volumes about who you are as a person.

[swilton]

18. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree

[Octafish]

19. 'Dumb' was the last guy's excuse.

Now it seems there's another rationale for the same old agenda at play.

[LWolf]

20. When a few brave souls pointed this out

before his inauguration, and during the first six months, and then year, and then 18 months, of his term, we were thoroughly bludgeoned, and then told:

"Give him TIME!!! He hasn't even had TIME!!!!"

Has he had enough time yet?

[lame54]

21. So, the question remains unanswered