He mentions “stalemate in Washington”, but he’s never been caught working with congress. He’s a lazy bum, which is a big reason the stalemate has been perpetuated.
Blaming Bush by saying “what we were told before 2008”.
I'm glad to hear they're rolling out the new strategy. Because it sounds more like a concession speech than a case for reelection.
Yep. Thankfully he is too lazy and arrogant to do the best thing for his reelection which would be showing up for work at 8 am in Oval Office. If he just engaged Congress and got down to work on the business of the nation his approval ratings would improve.
Only the dimmest bulbs haven't figured out yet that he just has no interest in being an engaged POTUS. His antics look so juvenile in comparison to a serious businessman like Romney.
The undecideds are breaking to Romney because they want a serious leader on economic issues and not a buffoonish Barack Kardasian.
Well, HE had Democrat majorities in both houses of Congress the first two years of HIS term. If HE had focused on the economy instead of treating the Presidency as a part-time job, and provided leadership those first two years, HE wouldn't have to be begging for four more years.
Giving HIM four more years would be interpreted as a mandate that the people are behind HIM. HE would not focus on the economy. After all, HE's already said that climate change will be HIS focus during a second term.
And you can take this to the bank... if HE does win and if HE does focus on climate change, the actions to be taken to address that utopian topic, the economy will be even worse off in four more years than it is today. What will HE do then? Beg to repeal the amendment limiting President's to two terms in office, so HE can have more time to fix things?
The problem is that HE has an agenda and the primary element of that agenda does not include fixing the economy; it consists of imposing even harsher controls on all of us who need energy, such that even more businesses cannot survive in such an economic and regulatory environment.
I'd like to see a GOP ad coming out in favor of "Climate Change", but not the meteroligical climate. The political climate in Washington that needs changing, by electing a filibuster-proof GOP-led Senate.
I for one am tired of so-called leaders squandering so much of their political capital on issues that are not important to me or others; there comes a time to double-down and get the country running again.
The problem is that the current administration has focused so much on the social side that our economy cannot sustain itself in the current regulatory environment.
The golden goose of a growing economy that provides the resources to aid the underprivileged is almost dead. When we spend the bulk of our resources on non-productive activities and tax and regulate the productive side of our economy to death, pretty soon, there won't be any resources to support those non-productive activities any more. We're very close to being there now. As the libs like to say about climate change, "we've reached a tipping point" on the economy.
I say let's concentrate our efforts on the economy. And when we see it's nearing recovery, we can then start to look at the social side of gvernment. As President Reagan was fond of saying, "A rising tide lifts all boats."
If you try to lift those boats without the support of the tides, your results are sporadic and ineffectual for all boats... you can only lift a few of them. I say let's focus on activities that will lift up them all. When we do that, those who are left behind will be much fewer by more than half. We shouldn't be jeopardizing all of them by focusing on just a few.