DescentBB

President Obama on Wednesday pulled rank on the Republican presidential candidates, announcing a key jobs speech next week on the same night as a GOP 2012 primary debate in California.

The White House insisted the timing was coincidental

but the event has been on the schedule for months

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/08 ... z1WdQIC6rk


SO. is he hiding or trying to steal the thunder??

discuss

A key jobs speech from a guy who promised when he was campaigning for the position of President that he 'would be focused like a laser on jobs and the economy'....then one year into the job and the economy looking like a laser guided bomb tore it into shreds he said 'When I get back from summer vacation I'm going to outline my plans for jobs.'....then another year later, things looking even worse he said, again, 'When I get back from summer vacation I'm going to outline my plans for jobs.'.

I can't imagine anyone out there at this point who is still thinking Obama has any plan other than a plan for his next vacation.

and, on the other channel, a bunch of wannabe asshats from the other side of the problem talking in circles...

Hmmm...which one to watch?
I suggest Netflix.

Heh, a jobs speech when all his stealth regulations are strangling the very entities that would create jobs.
Such stellar pending regulation as dust control on farms:

"OKLAHOMA CITY -- The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is considering a crackdown on farm dust, so senators have signed a letter addressing their concerns on the possible regulations."

I'm wondering how farms will be able to plough a field without raising dust? Or how we are facing losing 10% of our power grid because of the new coal use regulations. Perhaps Obama will try and fool us into thinking green energy, you know, like he promoted a certain solar panel company a year ago:

"Solyndra was touted by the Obama administration as a prime example of how green technology could deliver jobs."

"Solyndra, a major manufacturer of solar technology in Fremont, has shut its doors, according to employees at the campus."

"I was told by a security guard to get my [stuff] and leave," one employee said. The company employs a little more than 1,000 employees worldwide, according to its website."

Maybe Obama will say how he is favor of drilling for oil again thinking we will all have forgotten how he effectively regulated out of existence 50,000 jobs when he shut down the oil drilling platforms. The only good thing may be is the stock market will take another dive and I can buy some stocks at the low point again.

SOS

Seems he failed... (Even here.)

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-3 ... peech.html

Uhh...whether you like the guy or not he is still the President and he doesn't have to play second place to a primary debate. I don't know what the problem is, Fox News will show the debate anyways over the President's speech. Just like they cut away when Obama look the GOP to task when they invited to talk about health care at their summit.

I love it when you guys literally grasp at the smallest straws you can each and every day.

And you can't admit when this president is the biggest FAIL since Jimmy Carter (actually, may be the biggest FAIL ever.)

TB, it's not really a question of epic fail or not. Cuda makes a post about it being on the same night as a GOP primary; I said that primary isn't a big deal considering Obama is still the president whether you like his policies or not. But he moved it anyways, so I guess it's all moot now.

And quite honestly, willingly sitting through those primary debates is a form of self-torture.

Too bad Obama didn't give a speech showcasing his economic recovery plan 2 years ago.

Zuruck wrote:Uhh...whether you like the guy or not he is still the President and he doesn't have to play second place to a primary debate.

agreed.... but you still didn't answer the question.

Is he hiding or was he trying to steal the thunder of the GOP by choosing to make his speech the same night as the debate??

He could have chosen ANY day of the year. but he chooses the night when Theoretically half the voting populace will be watching a GOP debate that had been scheduled for months. THEN when that doesn't work he chooses to move the debate to the start of Monday night football. so now nobody will be watching his speech.

On Kali we call that dodging.

CUDA wrote:..... he chooses to move the debate to the start of Monday night football. ...

He's really trying to refresh the whole 'He ain't really American!' thing isn't he?!? Monday Night Football for crying outloud!

Will Robinson wrote:

CUDA wrote:..... he chooses to move the debate to the start of Monday night football. ...

He's really trying to refresh the whole 'He ain't really American!' thing isn't he?!? Monday Night Football for crying outloud!

rat bastard how dare he interrupt MNF

Well if anything he needs to fire his political adviser. As much as I didn't like him, Rove at least knew what the hell he was doing.

Boehner's the first House Representative Leader to say NO to a speach request by a sitting U.S. President, so it proves he's an abominable asswipe. Now Obama and crew are either clueless idiots or are trying to pick a fight, at which they epically failed on both counts. Hopeless.

Typical. don't debate an issue just start name calling

TC you do realize it's the Speaker of the house prerogative to make the Invitation to the President to speak before the house. NOT the other way around.

what the President did was tantamount to inviting himself over to your house for dinner at a date. and time of his choosing.

It's unfortunat­e the White House ignored decades -- if not centuries -- of the protocol of working out a mutually agreeable date and time before making any public announceme­nt,

"I respectfully request the opportunity to address a Joint Session of Congress on September 7, 2011, at 8:00 pm," wrote President Obama to House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) around noontime Wednesday.

Boehner spokesman Brendan Buck indicated that his office only received President Obama's letter about 15 minutes before it was sent to the media.

so it proves he's an abominable asswipe

The Speaker of the house should be afforded the EXACT same Courtesies and Protocols that the President expects. the President played Politics and was called on it. while it might make Boehner look like an "asswipe" in your eyes. it is just another failure in the Presidency of Barack Obama in the eyes of the rest of the country.

CUDA wrote:what the President did was tantamount to inviting himself over to your house for dinner at a date and time of his choosing.

I actually don't see anything wrong with that. I'd love to have the president over for diner any time he wants. That would be so cool. We could totally talk about stuff.

Zuruck wrote:Well if anything he needs to fire his political adviser. As much as I didn't like him, Rove at least knew what the hell he was doing.

Actually he needs to fire himself for thinking this was a good idea....no matter who advised it. Just another example of a street organizer not having a clue as to how things should be done under the big top. I suspect Obama thinks so well of himself he actually thought he could wave his magic twanger and he could get whatever he wants. Then to top it all off he decides competing for airtime with MNF is a good idea also? No wonder even the left is starting to look for someone to run against him in the 2012 primaries. Obama is exhibiting a whole new level of incompetence that Jimmy "The Rabbit" Carter looks positively magnificent.

ITT woodchip has no concept of political workings

Top Gun wrote:ITT woodchip has no concept of political workings

Please explain those workings as you see them because I'm not seeing anything good for Obama coming from what his team has done. If there is some intelligent political tactic at work behind his waffling and seemingly bad timing choices I'd love to hear it.

Well what I'm really waiting for is woody to provide some semblance of factual support for his musings, as opposed to just leaving at "hurrdurr worst president evar." But it's woody, so I'm not about to hold my breath.

Not to mention that Today they reported ZERO jobs created last month. seems to me it's time to stop blaming Bush as he did in his last speech on the debt ceiling and find a way to get the private sector to create jobs.
Expanding the government is not job creation. I suspect this speech based on the reports will be a carbon copy of his last 3. More spending stimulus. Tax the rich

Many Democrats say they want to hear a forceful presidential push for new stimulus spending and middle-class tax cuts, with less emphasis on deficit reduction and government spending cuts they say could stunt job creation and hamper economic recovery.

Top Gun wrote:Well what I'm really waiting for is woody to provide some semblance of factual support for his musings, as opposed to just leaving at "hurrdurr worst president evar." But it's woody, so I'm not about to hold my breath.

what part of my post towards the top you don't comprehend? The jobs he killed for the oil rig workers and all the business they supported in the gulf area? Or maybe you don't understand killing the coal fired electrical plants with nothing to replace them with? Or maybe his focus on green jobs when his show case solar plant goes out of business. Or maybe you think Obama Care is not going to cost the govt. any money as you see more and more employers canceling the employee's insurance as it is cheaper to pay the penalty than to continue coverage. Perhaps you should explain how Obama has done something useful like driving around in a Canadian made bus all the while ignoring visiting the poor black parts of town. Need more?

CUDA wrote:Typical. don't debate an issue just start name calling

TC you do realize it's the Speaker of the house prerogative to make the Invitation to the President to speak before the house. NOT the other way around.

I don't give a rat's behind. Never in our country's history has a Speaker of the House refused a sitting president's request for a speech date when asked. It doesn't matter that Obama's crew effed up or did it on purpose, it's the impropriety of statesmanship that counts. But what's more damning is that I heard on NPR that Boehner apparently said "yes" before he said "no". It appears that Boehner listened to a screaming Rush Limbaugh, who ranted on and on and said the Boehner should "put Obama is his place" during his radio show. Talk about a racist rant. What's worse is that Boehner caves to his titular leader of the GOP and forces Obama to move the date to the next day, which happens to coincide with the kickoff of the NFL. Like that's any better. It totally misses the intended audience on the West Coast too. It's just another Republican "screw you" to a president they've been working against ever since he was elected. So I'm at perfect liberty to call Boehner an "asswipe".

http://www.seeingtheforest.com/archives ... ugh_pu.htm

tunnelcat wrote:I HATE REPUBLICANS, I HATE REPUBLICANSTalk about a racist rant.I HATE REPUBLICANS, I HATE REPUBLICANS

Please enlighten on what racist comments Limbaugh said. because I believe your just making it up like you usually do when you scream racist. Just so you can continue to name call.

woodchip wrote:

Top Gun wrote:Well what I'm really waiting for is woody to provide some semblance of factual support for his musings, as opposed to just leaving at "hurrdurr worst president evar." But it's woody, so I'm not about to hold my breath.

what part of my post towards the top you don't comprehend? The jobs he killed for the oil rig workers and all the business they supported in the gulf area? Or maybe you don't understand killing the coal fired electrical plants with nothing to replace them with? Or maybe his focus on green jobs when his show case solar plant goes out of business. Or maybe you think Obama Care is not going to cost the govt. any money as you see more and more employers canceling the employee's insurance as it is cheaper to pay the penalty than to continue coverage. Perhaps you should explain how Obama has done something useful like driving around in a Canadian made bus all the while ignoring visiting the poor black parts of town. Need more?

So what, after an unprecedented ecological disaster, we should have just kept drilling like usual without maybe taking some time to look around and make sure another massive oil spill wasn't a month away? And holding electricity production to some general standard of accountability for the materials produced in the process is also a bad thing? All those examples you're providing are reasons why Obama is far from a poor president, though I can note that issues like that one with employer insurance could largely have been avoided if it weren't for certain groups' blatant obstructionism.

And yet oh hey, maybe woody does get his wish, because today Obama bent over and agreed to lessen smog regulations, since those poor widdle energy companies can't pony up to make their output cleaner. Ugh. Also, the House Republicans apparently want to slash the budget for hurricane hunter flights in half, because like, who needs those?

CUDA wrote:Typical. don't debate an issue just start name calling

TC you do realize it's the Speaker of the house prerogative to make the Invitation to the President to speak before the house. NOT the other way around.

first off, this is the ONLY, I repeat, the ONLY time in American history that a President has had such a request denied. Speaks volumes of American politics, at present.

Second, the resulting time(7 pm on Thursday) will probably yield a much larger audience, as it leads up to the opening of the NFL season. The last half of the speech will probably have 3 times the audience he would have seen on Wednesday night. As for half the electorate watching the GOP debate, Cuda, please get a grip.....hell, half the electorate doesn't even vote, and less than 20% of them consider themselves GOP loyalists. I dare say that an early debate like this one wouldn't outdraw Rescue Me or Jersey Shore.
Once again, though, I read with enormous amusement a bunch of knee-jerk reactions of complete disrespect for the elected President of the nation. And, next week, I'll no doubt see more of the usual handwringing over where we are as a country, and why we are in this handbasket. Yeesh!

callmeslick wrote: As for half the electorate watching the GOP debate, Cuda, please get a grip.....hell, half the electorate doesn't even vote,

C'mon Slick you knew what I meant

callmeslick wrote:first off, this is the ONLY, I repeat, the ONLY time in American history that a President has had such a request denied. Speaks volumes of American politics, at present.

Totally…meaningless…statistic.

Maybe he was the only president in history to request a joint session, during something the speaker considers more important.

(yes, a debate is more important than a speech)

I'm just finding it amusing that there is so much more flak about the scheduling than the likely content.

[Edit: I'll be watching the game on Thursday night, but won't be watching the speech.]

It seem pretty evident that no matter what Obama chose to do, you guys would have some argument with it. So it doesn't really matter.

What makes me laugh is the whole nonsense that unemployment is ever going to really go back down. Too few jobs for too many people...

Zuruck wrote:It seem pretty evident that no matter what Obama chose to do, you guys would have some argument with it.

Actually at least in my case that's not True. I would have been fine with the release of his speech on any other day. but I feel that he chose that day PURELY for political reasons. I do feel that if this issue was as important as he was claiming it was he might have made it earlier.

Now the content might be a different story. if he proposes the same BS that he's said in his last 4 Jobs speeches that have not worked then I would rail on him for that.

CUDA wrote:I would have been fine with the release of his speech on any other day. but I feel that he chose that day PURELY for political reasons. I do feel that if this issue was as important as he was claiming it was he might have made it earlier.

I think you might be giving him too much credit, could be just another one of those “oopsie” moments.

Zuruck wrote:It seem pretty evident that no matter what Obama chose to do, you guys would have some argument with it. So it doesn't really matter.

What makes me laugh is the whole nonsense that unemployment is ever going to really go back down. Too few jobs for too many people...

Not so fast, the following shows there may be a glimmer of a brain in Obama's normally vacuous head. If he decides that what everyone's been telling him about regulations as being job killers is true and kills enough regulations that there is actual jobs growth, then he may have a small chance to be re-elected:

"WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama on Friday scrapped his administration's controversial plans to tighten smog rules, bowing to the demands of congressional Republicans and some business leaders.

Obama overruled the Environmental Protection Agency — and the unanimous opinion of its independent panel of scientific advisers — and directed administrator Lisa Jackson to withdraw the proposed regulation to reduce concentrations of ground-level ozone, smog's main ingredient. The decision rests in part on reducing regulatory burdens and uncertainty for businesses at a time of rampant uncertainty about an unsteady economy."

What he is doing here is something I whole heartedly agree with Obama for doing. So now Zuruck, you can quietly go have a coronary from my reply

How in the world can you view that as a good thing? If everyone who actually knows what they're talking about says, "These current levels are a problem," isn't that a pretty damn clear sign that they should be cut back? I don't buy for a second that the increased regulations represent a significant burden on multibillion-dollar corporations, nor that their easing will help ease said burden.

You are absolutely correct, those “multibillion-dollar corporations” won’t feel a thing…they will simply pass every nickel of costs right along to you know who.

It is stupid to assume that the first time a President has been denied a joint session that it must be the fault of the Speaker and not the President for the refusal.

If this is the first time a President has broken protocol and sent his request to the Speaker at the same time he sent his announcement to the media to announce the session instead of discussing it with the Speaker and working out the schedule BEFORE making the announcement as all previous Presidents have done then you have to be a partisan hack to blame the Speaker.
Especially if the President was so arrogant to take it upon himself to announce the joint session, without confirmation/acceptance on a date and time that conflicts with a political event of interest to the Speakers party which was already slotted for that TV time slot weeks in advance and that time slot was known to the President.

You have to have your nose so far up Obama's butt you can taste his breakfast before he does to blame the Speaker for not bending over for his royal highness in a situation like that.

Zuruck wrote:It seem pretty evident that no matter what Obama chose to do, you guys would have some argument with it. So it doesn't really matter.

What makes me laugh is the whole nonsense that unemployment is ever going to really go back down. Too few jobs for too many people...

The last part goes to the heart of the matter. What Obama has been trying to get out(with nothing but static and nonsense from both the GOP and the Dems in Congress) is a two part concept.
1. Keep what jobs we can afloat for the moment.
2. Rebuild the foundations needed(education and infrastructure) to have job growth down the longterm road.

As it stands, there is exactly ZERO reason for any sane person to expect even the level of unemployment and underemployment we now have. There is muted domestic demand, business efficiency has been steadily growing, so fewer workers per unit are needed, the skill set of our workforce is mediocre and heading towards laughable. Lots of luck with putting lipstick on that pig, and anyone, here or elsewhere, who suggests that by merely forgoing regulataions or tinkering with taxes or(worst of all in this economy) slashing government is going to have any positive effect, is absolutely insane.

Just an off-the-cuff comment on your post, callmeslick, but it seems like you're suggesting that Obama is trying to reinvent the worker for the economic situation we find ourselves in (and no one seems to be able to provide a solution for). Obviously "foregoing regulation" and "tinkering with taxes", and "slashing government" are all actions with a focus on changing the source of the problem rather than changing the party that is effected by the problem.

Based on that observation I would say that Obama really is running on change, even if he wasn't totally honest about what that change was, and the most sure way to change a system is to ★■◆● up the old one first. So his goals are either a cop-out (not really trying to fix the system itself) or a deliberate attempt to cause aspects of the system that don't jive with his vision for the country to fail, through neglect or sabotage.