Obama’s Mantra: Don’t Blame Me

You have to feel sorry for President Obama.  He gets such a bad rap.

Gas prices are high and going higher and despite what you hear from his enemies, it’s not his fault.

We’re in the midst of the weakest post-recession recovery since before World War II, and again, despite what his mindless detractors tell you, the lackluster economy nearly four years into his term isn’t his fault either.

Now we learn that the 2010 shellacking the Democrats took in Congressional races – the one where they lost the House and every dope thought it was because the voters were fed up with the president and his party’s runaway spending – well, we now learn that we were wrong, that that wasn’t his fault either.

You know whose fault it was?  Take a guess.  If you said Fox News, pat yourself on the back.

According to a new book  called Showdown, by Mother Jones journalist David Corn, President Obama told union officials in 2010 that he was “losing white males” because a lot of them watch Fox News and “hear Obama is a Muslim 24/7 and it begins to seep in.”

There’s just one problem with the president’s analysis.  It isn’t true.

After quoting from Showdown on his newscast, Fox News anchor Bret Baier said, “For the record, we found no examples of a host saying President Obama is a Muslim.”

So let’s review:  High gas prices have absolutely nothing to do with President Obama’s war on coal, or his veto of the Keystone HL pipeline, or his decision to shut down drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, for a very long time, after the BP disaster, or his opposition to drilling in Alaska, or his war on frakking, to name just a few things that aren’t his fault.

The weak economy?  Two words:  Bush’s fault.

And now that perennial Obama White House villain pops up once more, Fox News, accused of doing something it didn’t do.

For much of his life President Obama has been showered in praise.  For much of his life he’s been told that he’s the smartest guy in the room.  In school, kids were drawn to him because he was cool.  When he got older journalists slobbered all over him for the same reason … and also because he was young, liberal and black. Who among us wouldn’t believe we were wonderful, and blameless, given so much affection?

If a majority of voters in November believe that our nation’s problems aren’t Mr. Obama’s fault, but rather the dirty work of anti-Obama bogeymen all over the place, the president likely will win re-election.  But if he loses, that won’t be his fault either.  The real reason, we will be told by liberal pundits, is racism in America — not concern about Mr. Obama’s policies or his competence.  The real reason, they will tell us, is that white people could no longer tolerate a black man in the nation’s top position.  And I suspect, Mr. Obama will believe it, too.  After all, it couldn’t be his fault.

 

Bernie's Next Column.

Enter your email and find out first.

  • MiriamShoshana

    Obama is not a Muslim. He’s a Rasha. I, for one, am not laughing.

    • Don W

      Is that like a Rooski?

  • http://www.mostly-right.com/ Jeff Metz

    Its a running joke around the office that when something goes wrong we just simply blame George Bush.  They will be using that line in 4 more years.  Did anyone take notice that Ronald Reagan didn’t blame Jimmy Carter?  This President has been out to lunch for 4 years and unfortunately may get another 4 to keep being out.  Scary.

    Jeff Metz
    http://www.mostly-right.com

    • Kevin

       When the earthquake hit DC last year, President Obama declared shortly after the event that his team of scientists discovered the source of the earthquake. It came from a fault that has developed in the 8 years prior to Obama taking office. It was Bush’s Fault.

  • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/PPL2AXPXJMWPEJWFN34MPC5RNY terry

    OBAMA GOES TO KOREA,  SAYS    N KOREA MUST STOP LIVING IN DENIAL, DECEPTION AND DECEIT !

    OK,  NOW I’D LIKE TO SPEAK TO PRES OF RUSSIA ABOUT A SECRET DEAL ON MISSILE DEFENCE.

  • Johncasertano

    even if republicans get country back on track with reduced spending more oil drilling it will not last. when economy recovers and things get better we will go back to out of control spending and giving away the farm . term limits for congress, one term maybe 4 year terms, are our only hope . the system will never work with congress more woried about gett ing voted back in then doing whats right not just for there district but the country. the more people living on state help and voting for canidate that gives every benifit possible instead of whats good for country how is it possible to get back on track. i guess when jfk said ask not what your county can do for you ask what you  could do for my country  would be a laughing stock  and no chance to be voted in. we are doomed

  • Kulthum Kassim Ally

    I dont think he was fair to blame fox

  • Rcmoore2

    If Obama is re-elected, I’d like to go to Israel, sit on a park bench and just  watch Netanyahu blow Iran off the map.  That would be a lot more satisfying than sitting around with the Big Zero for four years, watching him destroy the American dream of life, liberty & the pursuit (without handouts) of happiness.

  • Jeannette

    It is hoped that after November the big zero will be able to say that we won’t have him to kick around anymore.

  • Wallace Flint

    Bernie,
       Now I see Obama is directing  the powers-to be- to go ahead with the pipeline with all haste. What timing! Pure politics! This Clown Prince plays the politics with everything he touches. The sooner he gets out, the sooner we get our country back!

                      In God We Trust!
                      Wally Flint, Boonville, NY
      E-mail address- Wallaceflint@aol.com

    • Kevin

       He is approving a portion of the pipeline that does not require Presidential approval, and is 1500 miles from Canada. It’s like walking around with shoes on and no shirt or pants. How embarrassing. It’s politics alright…really bad politics, showing how desperately this President is trying to look relevant after blowing every opportunity to get the energy flowing into this economy. How sad and how embarrassing to be caught with your pants down.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/5Z3L7DFVLUSXNDXRRIAMSMQYD4 General Zod

    i agree completely that if he isn’t re-elected, it will be blamed on white people. early on in his presidency, you had such rational people like janeane  garofolo proclaiming as a fact.  it wouldn’t surprise me at all if they start setting up that camp of thought in the public sphere sometime this summer. and liberal op columnists will likely be the ones beating those drums the hardest. most of them simply refuse to believe that one could disagree with his magnificent ivy-league intellect.
    plenty of idiots have come from the ivy leagues. he is just the reigning  king.

  • Richard dant

    Thank you for your  thoughts.

    Richard Dant

  • http://zakzek.blogspot.com/ MCFergy

    Barack Obama, smart? “Clever like a fox.” All this man cares about is being cool and being the center of attention… he leaves the heavy progressive lifting to his long time puppet-master Auntie Valerie and blame-aholic David Axelrod.

  • Vinbick44

    Black, White, Green, or any other color one one’s skin is NOT an issue,period.  BO stinks, and everyone knows it.  Lack of leadership, terrible policies and plans, anti-American actions are what make him stink up the place.  Those of us who call ourselves conservatives simply want to pursue the great American dream:  life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  That requires less government involvement in our lives, not more.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_DGT5LFXDWHPKRWLSI2WPBXIGXE Wil

      Do you really want to ge back to the Bush era?

  • Kevin

    Even Bush expressed regret for the failed intelligence leading to the invasion of Iraq. And I don’t remember him whining about the mainstream media continuing to breathe life into the canard that he lied so he could complete his daddy’s first mission. In fact, I would characterize his relative silence as the utmost class a sitting executive could demonstrate during a period of withering criticism, some of it deserved.

    Obama has accepted blame for everything that he perceives as the wrongdoing of America before he got here, and found it within his responsibility to apologize for it around the world.  

    • Kevin

       I really have to retract and re-state myself. He never really accepted blame for any of the things he apologized for. I think specifically of the moment when he followed Hugo Chavez to the microphone after Chavez spent about 45 minutes ripping the US, and said something like, “Well at least I was not responsible for any of those things”, never once defending the US.  To answer your question, in a word: no.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_DGT5LFXDWHPKRWLSI2WPBXIGXE Wil

       
      Even Bush expressed regret for the failed intelligence leading to the invasion of Iraq.>>  
      Bush was the ‘ failed intelligence!’

      • StanW

        Wil, are you talking about statements like this…
        “We Have To Defend Our Future From These Predators Of The 21st Century. They Feed On The Free Flow Of Information And Technology. They Actually Take Advantage Of The Freer Movement Of People, Information And Ideas. And They Will Be All The More Lethal If We Allow Them To Build Arsenals Of Nuclear, Chemical And Biological Weapons And The Missiles To Deliver Them. We Simply Cannot Allow That To Happen. There Is No More Clear Example Of This Threat Than Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. His Regime Threatens The Safety Of His People, The Stability Of His Region And The Security Of All The Rest Of Us.”

        …and this…
        “Earlier Today I Ordered America’s Armed Forces To Strike Military And Security Targets In Iraq… Their Mission Is To Attack Iraq’s Nuclear, Chemical And Biological Weapons Programs And Its Military Capacity To Threaten Its Neighbors …”

        These were so terrible and wrong. The President should have known better!

  • FloridaJim

    I do not find anywhere where Obama has ever accepted blame for anything substantial, do you?

  • Kevin

    Fox is no more responsible for propagating the Obama/Muslim myth because they gave air to those theories floating around by others than ABC, CBS, NBC, MSLSD and others are responsible for propagating the 911 inside job by Bush theories for the same reason. BTW I don’t remember Bush complaining that “people hear the mainstream media saying 911 was an inside job and it seeps in”.  This is the whining-est administration in history. Can you imagine the likes of Eisenhower, or Truman or Reagan whining like this?

    I wonder why the President does not blame Bush for increased oil production? After all, that administration was actually responsible for increases in oil leases that are now becoming productive. The president is finally taking responsibility for something that is happening on his watch, and ironically it really was Bush’s fault.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_DGT5LFXDWHPKRWLSI2WPBXIGXE Wil

      Kevin, Bush
      administration started an unprovoked war, doubled the national debt, a
      budget-crushing $1.5 trillion-dollar tax cuts for the rich, spied on the
      American people, let New Orleans drown and turned the United States into a
      nation of torturers. We will be SEVERAL DECADES correcting the mess Bush and the
      Republicans created.

      • Kevin

        Here we go. Trot out the Bush canards. Of course the war was unprovoked, that is why Kerry and about a dozen other prominent democrats were for it before they were against it.  The deficit spending under Bush was 1/3 that of the Obama administration, and Obama doubled down on eight years of Bush’s debt in a mere three and a half years. But more importantly those so called tax cuts resulted in the largest revenue to the Treasury in our nation’s history and they were so bad for us, that Obama extended them (then complained about extending them). Unemployment was 5% or so and the highest unemployment was about 6% under Bush. If the economy was today what it was under Bush, Obama would be beating his chest instead of whining and complaining.  And may I remind you that the economy tanked on the back of mortgage backed securities because Barney Frank and Chris Dodd were gettting sweetheart deals and who knows what else from mortgage giants, and all the while proclaiming Fanny and Freddie are in good shape, then later admitting oh, I guess it was the subprime market that brought everything down.  No,not only will this not take decades to recover from, it will only take a leader who will unleash the American will to succeed and stop shackling it with taxes and regulations that are strangling Americans at all levels. It’s time to stop the divisiveness and Bush bashing.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_DGT5LFXDWHPKRWLSI2WPBXIGXE Wil

          Obama inherited an economy that was so bad that Bush himself signed the bailout
          into law – the product of failed Republican policies . . .   Obama was
          looking at the Great Recession and the possibility of a Great Depression – and
          still is.

          • Jeffreydan

              Gosh, Wil, I’m impressed. Usually by now you’d be cowering under your desk.Now for more badly-needed education for you:
             
              No matter how much you try to blame him, President Bush only had a role in the economy’s downturn; the democrats were in fact the chief cause of it. Now, BO owns it 100%, which even the idiot head of the DNC admitted. 

              Bush was a far superior president, and it’s not his fault BO’s administration is such a fiasco. Blaming Bush only makes you look more pathetic now, almost as pathetic as a guy with huge legislative majorities whining about others preventing his efforts.  

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_DGT5LFXDWHPKRWLSI2WPBXIGXE Wil

            You’re joking…right?

          • Jeffreydan

              “You’re joking…right?”*************************  No. The constant blaming of others by liberals is indeed pathetic.  I understand your not getting that, introspection not being a liberal strength.  

          • Bob Hadley

            Don’t kid yourself, introspection is not much of a trait in any ideologue. 

          • Bob Hadley

            There you go, blaming the Democrats for the recession under Bush.  Although there’s a lot of responsibility to go around, Bush had a BIG role in the recession. 

            And, that the way to go: using buzz words like whine and pathetic.  You must have read Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals”

          • Jeffreydan

            On the roles in the recession: I wasn’t “blaming the Democrats…” I blame BOTH them and President Bush. Bush spent money like a liberal.  The legislation that led to bad home loans was penned by democrats, and democrats balked at Bush when he tried to address a potential breakdown that might result from it.  

              On buzz words: I’ll use “carp” and “pitiful” next time. : )>

          • Bob Hadley

            fyi “pitiful” is a buzz word of the Saul Alinski type (it’s also used on grade school playgrounds a lot).

            Bush also encouraged mortgage companies to allow home loans for low income people.  He did not make mmuch noise about a potential breakdown.  It was more of a CYA strategim.

            I agree that there’s a lot of reposibility to go around.

    • Bob Hadley

      “BTW I don’t remember Bush complaining that “people hear the mainstream media saying 911 was an inside job and it seeps in”. This is the whining-est administration in history. Can you imagine the likes of Eisenhower, or Truman or Reagan whining like this?”

      As far as I know,  the MSM gave 9/11 conspiracy theorists scant coverage, and when they did it was very critical coverage. 

      President Reagan blamed Jimmy Carter for practically everything from the time he first took office until well into his second term.  The two main differences is that President Reagan did his whinning with such wit and charm that many didn’t notice it for what it was and that he didn’t have to deal with the 24/7 cable “news” networks.

      • Kevin

        I don’t remember all the complaining. I remember the explosive growth that doubled federal revenues during his term, with 7% GDP and plummeting unemployment. By this time in the Reagan presidency first term, I remember Reagan campaigning on his own record, calling it “Morning in America” and selling the American pride that caused millions of Democrats to vote for him, winning him 49 states. As with the Bush economy, if this president had a Reagan economy he would be beating his chest instead of whining and complaining.

        • Bob Hadley

          If you don’t remember all the whinning from President Reagan etiher you weren’t paying attention, you were bamboozled by reagan’s wit and charm and/or you managed to overlook it beause you liked Reagan.

          Reagan took a real hit in the 1982 mid-terms (although not as much as President Obama) and the economy was somewhat better by this time in his first term., but remember that recovery was a little slow in coming. 

          Although the so-called misery index under Reagan was worse than now, President Reagan didn’t have to deal with the collapse of the housing market and the failing financial institutions. 

          The economy under President Clinton was much better than under President ZReagan, but whose comparing?  :)

          • Kevin

            I hope President Obama runs for re-election on the basis of the misery index.

            Somewhat better? GDP was growing 7% by this time in the Reagan presidency. He won 49 states by asking people if they felt any better about America in 1984 than the did in 1980. This President said he was qualified to solve all the problems he so eleoquently railed against in 2008. On what mantra will he run, four years later: “Without my leadership, it could have been so much worse”? “My misery index is lower than Reagan’s”?  He hasn’t solved a single problem he identifiied in in 2008.

          • Bob Hadley

            The economy was not growing at a rate 7% by this time in President Reagan’s first term.  It was under 4%.  And unemployment had just dropped from the 10% level that it was in through the 1982 midterms

            But you apparently ignored my point above that economy now is much better than than the one President Bush handed over to President Obama.  The trajectory of economy has almost completely reversed. 

            If the economy now was still what it was like when President Bush left office, President Obama would have nothing to beat his chest about.

            Reagan won 49 states due to an excellent capaign and a lackluster opponent who admitted that he’s raise taxes.  Reagan ridiculed this but  continued to raise taxes anyway.

            I’m not saying that Reagan was a bad president, but let’s deal with facts not mythology.

          • Kevin

            Yes, let’s http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/us_gdp_history GDP 1983 was 3.5 trillion. GDP 1984 was 3.9 trillion an 11% rise. Sorry, it wasn’t 7% it was 11%.
            From its website: 1983 3534.6 0.00 1984 3930.9 0.00 GDP as measured in billions.

            The economy was on fire. I know. I was there. Obama should really run on his record on the economy. Somehow he is having a bit of difficulty doing that. I don’t wonder why. The economy sucks.Anyone doing business in it today knows that.

          • Bob Hadley

            Year:Quarter

            %
            Growth

            Year:Quarter

            %
            Growth

            1980:1

            1.70

            1985:1

            2.10

            1980:2

            -10.10

            1985:2

            3.10

            1980:3

            -0.20

            1985:3

            4.90

            1980:4

            7.10

            1985:4

            2.60

            1981:1

            5.90

            1986:1

            5.30

            1981:2

            -1.90

            1986:2

            -1.10

            1981:3

            2.30

            1986:3

            2.50

            1981:4

            -5.70

            1986:4

            0.80

            1982:1

            -5.60

            1987:1

            3.00

            1982:2

            1.80

            1987:2

            4.90

            1982:3

            -2.20

            1987:3

            4.10

            1982:4

            0.20

            1987:4

            6.20

            1983:1

            2.60

            1988:1

            3.00

            1983:2

            10.90

            1988:2

            3.80

            1983:3

            6.50

            1988:3

            2.40

            1983:4

            7.00

            1988:4

            4.30

            1984:1

            7.40

            1989:1

            3.50

            1984:2

            5.00

            1989:2

            1.70

            1984:3

            2.30

            1989:3

            0.10

            1984:4

            2.30

            1989:4

            1.80

             

            Source:  Bureau of
            Economic Analysis

                       

            Kevin, above are the real stats for growth during President Reagan’spresidency.   There were some economic successes during this time, but your claims are wild exaggerations.  Let’s deal in facts.

            As I said before, the economy now is in much better shape than when President Bush handed it over.  Blind partisans will create their own reality, though. 

            The anti-Obama crowd will do its best to preach doom and gloom.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_DGT5LFXDWHPKRWLSI2WPBXIGXE Wil

          Ronald Reagan sold a democratic society on the idea that their own government
          was the enemy. And he repeated that charge while sitting as the head of that
          government. You quite literally had the President of the United States telling
          America that government of the people, for the people, and by the people was
          against the people.
          .

          Reagan convinced the country to grab our own throats, and squeeze. It’s little wonder
          that after three decades of his followers, we are left bruised and wheezing.

           

          • StanW

            BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

          • Kevin

             Reagan NEVER said government was the enemy. He said it was the “problem”.  What he DID say is concentrated power is the enemy of liberty. With what part of that would you argue?

            This comment boils the difference between the left and right down to its essence: the left loves government so much it humanizes it.  The right believes that government needs to be limited and controlled by people. 

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_DGT5LFXDWHPKRWLSI2WPBXIGXE Wil

            Reagan had excellent speechwriters and was a excellent speech giver…and a
            lousy economist. But since he is Saint Reagan, we won’t let go of the dumb ideas
            that we don’t really have to pay taxes in order to have a decent civilization,
            and that the wealthy people create all of our jobs, and that the way to have a
            thriving economy is to let the wealthy become super-wealthy, let the middle
            class become poor, and let the poor drop dead. Oh, and that kids can thrive on
            ketchup as a vegetable. 

          • StanW

            So it looks like you are all talk and no action, Wil. Or was my question just too hard for you to answer?

          • Kevin

            So…it was Reagans’ fault Obama cannot solve the problems he ran on solving in 2008.

          • Kevin

            And here I always thought it was Bush’s fault.

        • Bob Hadley

          “As with the Bush economy, if this president had a Reagan economy he would be beating his chest instead of whining and complaining. ”

          At the time of President Obama’s inauguration the economy had shrunk between 8% and 5% and we were losing jobs at the rate of more than 700,000 per month.   Unemoployment was at around 6% but was in the process of sky-rocketing.  The stock market was plummeting.  There were still intense fears of another Great Depression.

          The economic situation now, although not great, has turned around almost completely.  (The stock market has almost doubled since Obama took office.)  Unemployment is still unacceptably high, although it is a lagging indicator.

          I know I know I know.  The improvements occuring under President Obama are in spite of him and whatever ills currently exist are because of him, right?

          It is amazing how intense partisanship can warp perseptions.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_DGT5LFXDWHPKRWLSI2WPBXIGXE Wil

        Who cares? We’ll all be
        dead.——G.W.Bush.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_DGT5LFXDWHPKRWLSI2WPBXIGXE Wil

    Bernie, Oil
    and petroleum imports are down an average of more than 1.5 million barrels per
    day and domestic crude oil production has increased by an average of more than
    720,000 barrels per day since 2008. Domestic oil production has gone up every
    year under President Obama.

    • Tim Ned

      You’re missing the point, so has the price of Gasoline!!

      • Bob Hadley

        World demand for oil is increasing in leaps and bounds.  This, combined with Middle East instability (aka war drums), drives up the price of gas.

        Even Bill ‘Reilly has said that the only thing the president can do about gas prices is to call in oiil executives and try to persuade them not to go on the world market but to service this country.

  • http://www.facebook.com/garydenton Gary Denton

    Special Report On Obama: “Islam Or Isn’t He?” 

    Brit 
    Hume Falsely Claimed Obama’s Half-Brother Said Obama Had A “Muslim Background.There are dozens of times Fox guests have said Obama is a Muslim and the Fox News Hosts silently agreed.  Glen Beck, Fox News host, Obama is a Muslim was a major theme before he got too insane for even Fox News.  Goldberg should use a reliable source for his information.

  • DOOM161

    I haven’t watched Fox News in years, and I still don’t think Obama is doing a good job.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_DGT5LFXDWHPKRWLSI2WPBXIGXE Wil

      Then, what do you watch?

  • patriotbelle

    I’m still waiting for him to part the seas and walk on water!!!hahahahahaha…The problem is…..too many people believed all the BS he spewed to get elected and now it is and isn’t happening; he doesn’t want to take responsibility. Just par for the course for a hipocrat-democrat.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_DGT5LFXDWHPKRWLSI2WPBXIGXE Wil

    *Fox
    News anchor Bret Baier said, “For the record, we found no examples of a host
    saying President Obama is a Muslim.”*

    —————————————————-

    Bernie,
    In
    Fact, Fox — Including Special Report — Has Repeatedly Questioned
    Obama’s Faith…

     

    Special Report On Obama: “Islam Or Isn’t He?”
    During a June 2009 segment, Special Report aired a quote by Obama
    foreign policy adviser Denis McDonough, in which he talked about how Obama
    “experienced Islam on three continents” and spent part of his childhood in
    Indonesia with a Muslim father. Special Report included this question
    above the quote: “Islam Or Isn’t He?” [Fox News, Special Report with Bret
    Baier, 6/3/09]
    Charles Krauthammer: Obama “Does Have A Muslim Upbringing … And An
    Affinity for Islam As A Result.” On Special Report
    Brian Kilmeade Asks, “If [Obama] Was Worried” About People Thinking
    He’s Muslim, “Wouldn’t He Have … Kept His Name As Barry And Not Barack?”
    On the August 30, 2010, edition of Fox & Friends,
    Fox Contributor Steve Hayes: “It’s Hard To Sort Of Unwind” Idea Obama
    Is A Muslim “Now.” From the August 20, 2010 edition of Fox News’
    Special Report:
    Hume Falsely Claimed Obama’s Half-Brother Said Obama Had A “Muslim
    Background.” On the June 16, 2008, edition of Special
    Report,
    On Fox, Donald Trump Claimed Obama’s Birth Certificate “Maybe …
    Says He Is A Muslim.” On The O’Reilly Factor,
    Fox Nation Promoted Trump’s Claim That Obama May Be A
    Muslim. Fox Nation promoted Trump’s claims that Obama may be a Muslim,
    writing: “Trump On Obama: ‘Maybe He’s a Muslim.’
    Fox Guest Suggested Obama Is Secretly Muslim. Fox &
    Friends hosted controversial Pastor Robert Jeffress,
    Fox Hosted “Conservative Comedian” Who Claimed Obama Is “Faking”
    Being Christian. Fox & Friends hosted “conservative
    comedian” Brad Stine.
    Fox Contributor Morris: Obama’s Interpretation Of His Faith Is “Not
    How The Average Christian In The United States” Would Put It. On
    September 29, 2010, Fox News’ America’s Newsroom
    Beck On Obama’s Beliefs: “That’s Not The Church That Jesus Taught
    About.” From the August 24, 2010, edition of Fox News’ Glenn
    Beck:
    Fox & Friends Pushed False Smear That Obama Attended A
    “Madrassa.” On the January 19, 2007, editions of Fox & Friends

    On Fox News, Coulter Repeatedly Claimed Obama “Attended
    Madrassas.” On the December 28, 2009, edition of The O’Reilly
    Factor and the December 30, 2009, edition of Glenn Beck,
    conservative columnist Ann Coulter said Obama attended madrassas as a
    child.

     http://mediamatters.org/research/201203200003

     

    • JohnInMA

      Hey Wil you should have saved your fingers from all the typing and just posted the Media Matters links.

      Since when does a question equate to an accusation to a rational person?  The point made was that no Fox News anchor or reporter made any accusations  or claims.  Whether guests or contributors posed questions or made statements verbally or in writing is really a weak argument unless you (or MMfA) are willing to hold other news agencies to the same, new standard.  Care to form an opinion on news outlets who question Mormonism, or Bush’s service, or Palin birthing her last child, or……?  

      • Bob Hadley

        Asking a question implies that the question is legitimate.  That’s almost idiomatic.  If I repeatedly asked if you’re a Buddhist, wouldn’t you wonder why I asking that question, and even more so if you were not a Budhist?
         
        Giving substantial air time to a question insinuates that  the question is important and fact-based.  That is probably what President Obama meant. 

        What would you think if a network gave substantial air time to the “question” as to whether 9/11 was an inside job?

        • JohnInMA

          You are making my point.  Those who want to paint Fox also refuse to paint other news outlets who persistently question things.  

          It is valid for news organizations to question.  Whether or not they ask “too much” and ignore the opposite side is up to the listener.  I also have heard a lot about Obama being a Christian on Fox.  So who decides what is the right balance?  MMfA?  Whether or not those who appear are guilty of making accusations (or questioning too much) in other media is irrelevant.  

          • Bob Hadley

            “Since when does a question equate to an accusation to a rational person?” 

            First and foremost, your point was that FNC giving substantial air time as to whether President Obama is really a Muslim cannot encourage and even lead viewers to acrtually believe that he is a Muslim.  You also made the point that President Obama is wrong because no Fox reporter or host has said he’s a Muslim.

            According to the quote, President Obama said that when people keep hearing that he’s a Muslim it begins to seep in.  People have said or insinuated on FNC that Obama is a Muslim. 

            Again, giving substantial air time to this “question” implies that President Obama may well be a scret Muslim. 

            As to your tacked-on point that “they do it too,”  there’s a lot of criticism to go around.  I’ve criticized liberal bias.  But the issue at hand is FNC and the “question” as to whether Obama is a Muslim.  Why do change the subject.  Isn’t that what liberals do when they run out of excuses?

             Or is that you think the bias of the liberal MSM justifies FNC’s anti-Obama bias?

            BTW, what is the right balance on the questions as to whether 9/11 was an inside job or whether President G W Bush is a moron or whether Gov. Romney is a cultist? 

            If there is no credible evidence to legitimize a “question” or support a serious accusation there should be no coverage of it except to point out that raising such a question or making such a serious accusation is irresponsible.

          • JohnInMA

            Sorry, I never said what you think you read.  And I don’t buy into paranoid theories whereby there exist some sotto voce campaign to provide information that eventually “seeps in”.  Most always attempts to persuade are overt by comparison.  It applies all the way around.  While there are some progressives (which I distinguish from liberals) who have truly radical agendas, I don’t see the evidence that some say they see that there is an under the radar effort to “brainwash”.  Eventually it becomes overt.  Simply look at textbooks for one example of proof.  It isn’t secretive if you look for it.

            Likewise, I have watched FNC and MSNBC quite a bit to see the two sides.  There is little hidden agenda with either, and both organizations question along ideological lines.  Fox more often brings in the opposing viewpoints, and even the most shrill ideologues (9 PM, e.g.) entertain those who will counter-argue.  Even less convincing to me is the MMfA type list which started this thread suggests that criticism from pastors and other Christians with conviction in their beliefs is somehow a part of the hidden Muslim agenda.  Does that mean that all politicians criticized by Christians for actions against teachings are also secret Muslims?

            To suggest that there is a deliberate campaign to convince viewers – perhaps “unwitting” or “so dumb as to be malleable” in your eyes – that Obama is Muslim passes over the rational test and steps into the paranoid theory arena.

            More importantly, my point all along has been that for those who WANT to believe it, and therefore do, you should apply the same analysis to all news organizations.  Whatever logic is used, if any, should give you different results than what I read here.  Namely, most news organizations would be labeled the same, trying to feed information that “seeps in” along their ideological lines.  Instead it comes across as an unsupported ideological stab at Fox alone.

          • Bob Hadley

             ”the MMfA type list which started this thread suggests that criticism from pastors and other Christians with conviction in their beliefs is somehow a part of the hidden Muslim agenda”

            “…it comes across as an unsupported ideological stab at Fox alone.”

            What started this thread is Bernie’s addressing the quote attributed to President Obama that FNC promotes the idea that Obama is a Muslim.  Of course Bernie said FNC is innocent of the charge.

            Then, Will listed over a dozen times that FNC raised the quiestion as to whether Obama is a Muslim, had a guest who accused Obama of this or a host made the insinuation. 

            These are statements of fact.   They’re either true or false.  I have not heard any denials.

            Again, why do you change the subject? 

            You’re taking the “seep in” phrase much too literally.   It doesn’t mean subliminal messaging.  It’s a metaphor.   Obama was refering to the effects of overt repetition, not that of a subliminal campaign. 

            The Obama quote referred to does not ascribe a motive or a cluster of motives.  Rather, Obama refers to the effect of raising the issue and making accusations that he’s a secret Muslim.

            You have devoted a lot of words to evade the real issue:  Does raising the question as to whether Obama is a Muslim and entertaining guests who claim or imply that he’s a Muslim promote the idea that he”s a secret Muslim?  And no, none of the examples given are merely of  Christians criticizing Obama’s actions as unChristian.   They have context.

            Why would a respected and fair news organization that engages high jounalistic standards (as many regard FNC) keep raising the issue as to whether Obama is a Muslim and why would its personnel entertain guests who insinuate that he’s a Muslim? 

            I think FNC is primarily market-driven as opposed to ideological.   I think Roger Ailes was being candid when he said “I’m not in the politics business, I’m in the ratings business.”  FNC filters much of its reporting and coverage according to the demographics that it serves.  Some of this filter is political and some is not.  It just so happens that much of their demagraphics are anti-Obama. 

          • JohnInMA

            Good grief.  You aren’t reading what I write.  You are free to use whatever logic you choose as I stated.  Just use it across the board.

            Good luck with your conspiracies.

          • Bob Hadley

            I read everything you wrote.  You’re the who isn’t comprehending.  I specifically rejected your conspiracy canard.  That’s  a Red Herring.

            As far as using logic across the board, I do.  I already told you that I’m critical of liberal bias in the media. 

            But this discussion happens to be about FNC and its anti-Obama bias.  What does the deficits of one network have to do with the deficits of other networks?   Unless you’re using liberal bias to justify anti-Obama bias.

            And do you use this “across the board” line whenever someone criticizes the liberal media?  I suspect not.

            Another possible explanation is that you think Obama may really be a Muslim and you think FNC raising this question and havnig guests making this accusation is perfectly legitimate for a network claiming to have high journalistic standards.

          • JohnInMA

            Sorry, your argument boils down to a supposition at best and isn’t convincing.  My point all along is that people are free to use whatever logic they/you chose in arriving at a conclusion, even if predetermined.  But unless it is applied universally (such as to those outlets who continually say or question if “Bush lied”) then the position is especially weak and unworthy.

          • Bob Hadley

            But i do apply the “logic” universally.  But again, irresponsibilty of other networks doesn’t excuse FNC’s irresponsibility.

            Imagine a convicted felon appearing before a judge on sentencing day and saying, Gee judge, unless you convict everyone who does what i did my conviction is unworthy.

  • Kevin

    Brett Baier interviewed David Axelrod last night and Axelrod actually claimed the Senate has not passed a budget in three years because it was too hard. He didn’t use those words, but check it out on YouTube and tell me that’s not what he said.  In other words, it wasn’t their fault, it wasn’t his fault, it wasn’t President Obama’s fault.

  • Kevin

    Mr. Obama: I thought you ran on a platform of solving these problems. What have you been doing for the last three and a half years? 

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_DGT5LFXDWHPKRWLSI2WPBXIGXE Wil

      I’d say dealing with Republican stall tactics and their filibusters!

      • Kevin

        Am I led to believe by this that Mr. Obama’s large majorities in both houses for two years were foiled by the Republicans? I would have to say it was foiled by the public who realized what was going on and didn’t like it. And when confronted by his failures, the President began the blame game. It appears that his followers are quick to copy.

        No, contrary to this assertion, Mr. Obama got exactly what he wanted in those two years, eschewing the hard work on the economy to finally get socialized medicine past the American majority of people who disapproved of its passge, and it cost him every political chit in his pocket, as well as the filibuster proof majorities he enjoyed for two years.

  • beniyyar

    Obama was elected and is still supported by the sort of people who are experts at making up excuses, rationalizations, or justifications as to why they can never get ahead.  For Obama, like the Occupy Wall Street crowd, or the welfare recipients, it’s someone else’s fault, or they never got a fair chance, or the “system” is against them,  or the wealthy have advantages, or Fox News is inciting against them.  And this still played well until Obama made it plain that he couldn’t and wouldn’t even try to bring down gasoline prices.  Well, even his most irrational supporters including the most rabid environmentalists  have to buy gas to drive their cars, and believe me, every time they pull into a gas station and have to fork over five bucks a gallon, they wonder about how much longer they can support Barack Hussein Obama!

  • http://shawmut.blogspot.com/ Dave O’Connor

    He made it on blaming others; and if he wins, it’s because “We the People” allow him to continue his petulance. From Gibbs to Carney, I don’t recall press secretaries being so partisan; when their role should be the reporting out of the executive branch.
    This humble pedestrian would love to be so indulged that all I do right could be reflected in my mirror, and my errors, like parking tickets, llate payments and scalding the pan could only be attributed to others.
    But, gang, “We the People”, among whom are people we thought would be more savvy, have bought this act. They probably  donate to the Martin Sheen Presidential Library, too.
    “We the People” have been continually infantilized, and my concern is that while a president is treated as merely precocious for four years (considering the the campaigning season of 2008), “We the People” haven’t grown up much either.

    • Drew Page

      Dave  –  You use the term “We the People” as if there was such an entity.  I would suggest that there is no such homogeneous group.  I believe that the more correct term should be “We the Peoples”.   The point being that Americans fall into lots of different special interest groups.  If Obama wins re-election it will not be that “We the People” let it happen.  It will be because there may be more takers than makers.    The number of Americans dependent on government assistence has grown to the highest level since the Great Depression, including illegal aliens.  Nearly 50% of all wage earners pay no federal income taxes.  

      I am certain that the vast majority of those who are dependent on government, looking forward to general amnesty and  climbing aboard the gravey train funded by those who do pay taxes will continue to vote for any candidate and any political party that promises them more of the same.    That part of  ”We the People” who do work, pay federal income tax and want the government off our backs and out of our lives aren’t going to be the ones responsible for the current president’s re-election, if that happens.

      There are millions of us who do the right things, work, pay our taxes, give to charity and don’t ask anything from the government except to live within its means, as the rest of us are expected to do.   Don’t include us in that group you like to call “We the People”.  It will definitely not be our fault if this complete failure of a president gets re-elected.

      • http://shawmut.blogspot.com/ Dave O’Connor

        Point Drew.
        Regretably, I did not disguise my cynacism sufficiently. You could not be more correct with:
        “There are millions of us who do the right things, work, pay our taxes, give to charity and don’t ask anything from the government except to live within its means..” And, I number among them.
        With my choice of the term “We the People” I was exaggerating an error in public perception.
        Truly, I regret this error, and invite anyone who opts to follow up, to read my comment with a sarcastic view.
        I’m not so arrogant a person that I can’t stand and take the criticism.
        You served me well.

  • Brhurdle

    Do his supporters not see that his constant attempts to escape responsibility are undignified and unbecoming to the office of POTUS? I guess he doesn’t subscribe to the Harry Truman theory of “the buck stops here”. I’ve often wondered if the powers that be in the Democrat Party privately find him to be incompetent. Given the demeanors of Reid and Pelosi, it appears that this level of behavior may have become the standard of the Democrat Party. It is my observation that the Fourth Estate has completely relinquished it’s responsibility to critique errant political spinning.

    • Bob Hadley

      President Obama’s supporters subscribe to the Harry Truman theory of the “do nothing congress.”  :)

  • Brendan Horn

    The people who blame Fox News might as well also blame “Freedom of the Press”. They should push for a constitutional amendment banning freedom of the conservative press. The Obama administration is quite audacious in its delusional interpretation of current events. They take credit for things like a pipleline from Oklahoma, they claim Obama has done more for Israel than any other president (I guess this means all other Americans have done great harm to Israel), they claim the country would have reverted to a new stoneage without the orgy spending bill called a “stimulus”, and perhaps the most audacious Obama himself claimed he was one of the four best foreign presidents in modern times (his phrasing made it sound like he thought he might have been the best overall, but that his modesty prevented him from admitting this) dating back to Lincoln. His new audacious lie is that he is in favor of an “all of the above” approach to the energy issue. He seems to be in favor of all of the above – except for oil, natural gas, coal, and nuclear energy. In essence, he is closer to a none of the above approach.

    • brendan horn

      I mistakenly said Obama thought he was one of the best foreign presidents when I meant best “foreign policy” presidents.

      • Bob Hadley

        When and where did President Obama say this.? Do you have a direct link? 

        • Patrick

          President Obama said it in a television interview on 60 minutes this past December. Here’s the portion where he said:

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=TxvSjDkF7HE

          Hope this link works. 60 Minutes edited it out of the interview that was broadcast on television and but included it in the full interview that’s online at 60 Minutes overtime and a transcript of the full interview is on that 60 minutes website if you want to check it out.

          • Ron Kean

            Bob, 
            Say, ‘thank you Pat’.   Please tell him that now you understand and you agree that he’s right.  

          • Bob Hadley

            Ron, I haven’t viewed the video yet.  When I do, I’ll post a comment on it. 

            I have no problem in looking at evidence and seeing it for what it is.  If President Obama said it, he said it.  Period.  I keep telling you that I’m not an ideologue.   I seek truth, not ideology.

            As for your “now you understand” remark, I’m not certain what you mean.  I understood the quotation of President Obama.  What’s there to understand? 

          • Ron Kean

            Bob,
            You consistently ask for proof – links to statements that you question.  So now somebody spends the time to accommodate you and you don’t even go the link.  Huh?  It’s a waste of time to respond to you.

          • Bob Hadley

            Ron, lately you’ve started to get personal.  I thought that’s what you condemn liberals for.

            I have the link and will go to a different computer and play it.   The speakers on my computer are not working.  I went to another link that Patrick so kindly provided me a while ago.

            I must say that you’re quick to condemn!  Are you this way with everyone, or are you just this way with people whose views you don’t like?  Are you this way with yourself?

          • Ron Kean

            You’re always demanding that people show you proof as if you’re the judge or jury and they might be making something up.  It’s insulting to demand this of people. Do they not know what they’re talking about  if they don’t prove it to you?  Are they necessarily wrong if they’re not obedient? I wish I could remember you ever being satisfied with somebody’s effort.  It offends. You seem to like being contrary.  So I will be too.

          • Bob Hadley

            First, I don’t demand.  I request politely.  If someone thows harsh language at me, however, sometimes I’ll respond in kind.

            Second, you have sometimes challenged my ideas as I have ometimes challenged yours.  I have no problem with this.  That is one way to learn, by having yourt ideas and the underlying facts challenged.
            But when someone makes a serious statement of fact that sounds suspect, I reserve the right to request substantiation.  It baffles me that you resent being held accountable for something you say. 

            Questioning ideas and underlying facts is one of the ways to learn.  When I ask a question I am genuinely interested in learning, even if I’m a little (and i emphasize little) skeptical.  And any skepticism is sometimes laid to rest when i get the documentation. 

            You apparently have an emotional investment in certain ideas and when questioned about them or their underlying facts you react as though your religion is being attacked.

            I get much the same reaction when i talk to some liberal ideologues.  When I correct them on their facts or question their statements of fact, they will sometimes get resentful.     

            I don’t argue for the sake of argument.  My statements and questions are sincere.  Your last statement above (“You seem to like being contrary. So I will be too.”) indicates that you will simply be quarrelsome.  I hope that isn’t the case.

            It’s as if you looking for excuses to be offended.

            I thought one of the purposes for this website is to promote dialogue  and the exchange of ideas.  Let’s learn from each other.

          • Ron Kean

            ;- )

  • Guest

    Great read as usual Bernie, interested to see who he will blame if ObamaCare is struck down by the SC.

    • Drew Page

      If by some twisted logic the Supreme Court decides to rule that the ‘individual mandate’ in Obamacare is Constitutional, the United States as we know it is through.  If the government can mandate that citizens must purchase anything, including insurance, they can mandate that you have to purchase whatever else they say, using the excuse “it’s for the greater good”.  At that points American citizens have no rights other than to shut up and do what they are told.   This is exactly what I believe the Obama administration wants, a nation of people who will shut up and do what they are told.

  • Herky86

    Take esponsibility for nothing and take credit for everything. Pure genius, except when nothing is going right. Drone Diplomacy for a foregin policy and an economic gang that can’t shoot straight – BO is without a doubt the worst president we have ever seen.

  • Bretagneb

    I have been deeply ashamed for three years that we Americans fell for an act as transparently phony as Obama’s.  I have reluctantly reached the conclusion that the decline of America in the world is real, and that we will not survive as a people unless we elevate a right-wing dictator to sweeping power and junk the system that didn’t work for us.  Short of that, I would urge Americans to heed the investigation of Sheriff Joe Arpaio and stop trying to cut it down with ridicule.  Arpaio is actually on to something, and the Obama campaign has been to blanket such investigations with ridicule, so that others will abandon those efforts.
    People ask me why, in 1961 Obama’s grandparents would have posted an announcement of his birth in Honolulu as he was being born in Kenya.  They couldn’t have anticipated that he would some day run for the presidency.  I agree.  They wouldn’t have done it for that reason.  They would have done it to secure for him American citizenship with all the goodies that brings.

    • Drew Page

      Bret  Don’t say “we Americans fell for an act as transparent as Obama’s” unless you have a mouse in your pocket.  I never fell for his lies and incompetence for even a second, neither did millions of others.   I am sick of being catagorized as one of “We the People” who deserve the politicians we get.   Neither I nor millions of others who voted for the other guy in 2008 deserve what we have gotten from this incompetent, lieing, socialist.

    • Glen

      If you’re born to mother of US citizenship you ARE already a citizen yourself regardless of the country in which you were born.  Doesn’t play.

      • Ew

        Not if the father was a citizen of a foreign country.  His father was a citizen of Indonesia.  He is illegitimate.

        • Glen

          Does not change baby’s citizenship.

    • Bob Hadley

      Here we go again.  President Obama was born in Hawaii.   I was born in Hawaii and I finally dug up a certified copy of my short form birth certificate.  I used a certified copy of my BC to get my  passport.

      The format is exactly the same asthat of President Obama’s.  There is only a light seal on my BC.  Raised  seals are used by the Hawaii Dept. of Health solely to authenticate documents, i.e. prepare documents so that they can be used as evidence in court.  That way an official from the DOH won’t be subpoenaed to appear in court to authenticate a given document.

      The date my BC was issued is stamped on the back of the document.  The certification and signature of Alvin T. Onaka–the state registrar–is stamped on the back of the BC.

      I don’t know about my long form BC because I’ve never seen it. 

      BTW, did Peresident Obama’s grandparents really post his birth in the Honolulu dailies?  My impression is that they merely granted permission for the birth announcement to be published.  Newspapers do type of thing.  

        

  • JohnInMA

    It seems simple to me.  The Obama campaign has been in near full force since last summer and has been focused only on keeping those who are still in love with him on an emotional high.  Why else would they continually insult everyone else with their words and deeds?

    Once the GOP nominee/Romney is locked in, look for the ramp up to the ugliest mud slinging to get the focus off Obama and his blame everyone else strategy.  I predict they will expand on the anti-woman mantra and will bring in the race card.  Look for an attack on the Mormon church and its race history as a start.  It’s almost predictable.

    • Ron Kean

      We’re all waiting for the president to bring in the Mormon issue.  It would be a perfect opportunity to revisit Rev. Wright and the first big lie that Obama never heard anything like ‘G-d damn America’ from his pastor of 20 some odd years.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_DGT5LFXDWHPKRWLSI2WPBXIGXE Wil

        On the Hannity Show on Fox, it is 
        revisited about  Rev. Wright, almost daily.

    • http://shawmut.blogspot.com/ Dave O’Connor

      John, you’ve got points on that.  From Gibbs to Carney, I don’t recall press secretaries being so partisan; when their role should be the reporting out of the executive branch.Of course, Romney will be hit on, not only Mormon roots, but of course his success (not just in penning a book, either).
      Failing to open the book on Revs. Wright, Schueller, and ‘Calypso Louie’ Farrakhan and their knitting into Chicago’s politics, we’ll hear about Mormon discrimiation.
      And race?  How many people do we know, John, (even here in  our Bay State) think they “SHOULD” vote, not in the blind, but with color-enhancing filters.

      • JohnInMA

        I know more than a few Hillary fans that admitted to me they were okay with the nasty race and  voting for Obama in 2008 because he was black.  So, yeah that was the case.
        But not one of them is very excited to do it again.  It will be interesting to see how Obama’s popularity here changes, if at all, between now and the election.  He is still favored by about 70% now.

  • The DA

    Okay, I accept the Obama mantra.  Now what?

    The Achilles heel of Obama’s position is that he has failed to correct the problems created by others.   As a result we are in worse shape than when he started.  Despite whatever good qualities he possesses, he simply wasn’t up to the task.  If he couldn’t correct the problems created by others in his first four years, why in the world would anyone think he could correct them in his next four years as a lame duck president?   He had his chance and he failed.  It’s time for a change.

  • Career Soldier

    Particularly galling in light of the Riefenstahl-like re-election campaign video, proclaiming, “He didn’t blame others…”

    The truth of the matter is that this is the first president in history who has been responsible for nothing, not his policies and their easily predictable consequences, not his careless and hypocritical words, not his [few] actual deeds.

    Other than taking exaggerated credit for bin Laden’s death (he deserves credit for the go-ahead, but I’m afraid he didn’t press the trigger), the man’s singular accomplishment has been prolonging the recession he inherited, accompanied by expanding both the size of the federal government and the boundless expectations of the entitlement society.

  • http://twitter.com/ericinva Eric H.

    Wanna know what’s really scary? A President Obama unfettered by the prospect of having to run for reelection.

  • http://twitter.com/MichaelT11235 Michael Thompson

    Perception vs facts, perception is too often the winner. Thanks for the great article 

  • Rick Johnson

    Many of the 52.87% who voted for this manchild better wake up before November. Otherwise, 100% of us are going bankrupt with them.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_DGT5LFXDWHPKRWLSI2WPBXIGXE Wil

      “ manchild”? How nice!

  • cmacrider

    Bernie:  So if I understand you correctly, you are saying that if you are a complete narcissist and the entire world rotates around you ….. its a bit difficult to then say that things are not your fault.

  • Jairo A Puentes

    Obama looks weak when he blames everybody but himself for all the current financial problems. This behavior is not very dignified and shows a man who prefer to shift blame rather than to come with solutions.

  • Glen

    Yes, the same white people who elected him suddenly discovered he’s black and voted against him.  Were we not racist when we elected him?

  • Bruce A.

    Another good one.  This is what happens when the US elects a community organizer instead of someone with executive private sector or public admin. experience.

  • TRONINTHEMORNING

    Bernie, you nailed it; thanks for coming on my radio show and spelling it all out as only you can do.  

  • EH Rice

    Couldn’t have said it better.

    I think Santorum said it best:  America can’t survive another 4 years with an
    Obama administration unfettered by a by any fear of getting re-elected. 

    • http://twitter.com/ericinva Eric H.

      Hah! Just read your comment after I posted mine. Great minds, etc.

  • Ron Kean

    One irony is that at least you and Mr. O’Reilly have consistently demeaned people who question the president’s narrative about his birth and religion.

    • Glen

      Ron, even on the chance that this were a true & factual narrative, its focus would be doing Obama a huge favor by distracting from his verifiable shortcomings.  The media would simply restate, ” there go those wackos again, picking on Obama for no good reason other than he’s got a funny name and happens to be black”.  When watching a magician it’s never the overt movements that matter, those are the distractions.

      • Ron Kean

        That’s what they all say.

        • Glen

          The issue is TOXIC and counterproductive to anyone who wants to see Obama replaced.  I hope you’re proven correct someday, but for now it can only hurt the credibility of Obama opposition.