Mr. Obama’s hazy agenda for a second term

From the editors of the Washington Post (that bastion of far right wing propaganda)...

An acceptance speech is not a State of the Union laundry list of specific proposals. Its role is to set out a vision of the country’s future path. Mr. Obama was correct that he and Mr. Romney have dramatically different visions of government’s role, and that the Republican prescription of tax cuts to address any woe has left the country in terrible shape. Mr. Romney has been inexcusably vague in outlining his program, fiscal and otherwise, and he did nothing to mend this deficiency in his acceptance speech. But Mr. Obama’s speech also fell short — of his own proclaimed standards.

He vowed, “I will never turn Medicare into a voucher,” but he gave his audience no indication that his solution — controlling health care costs — might involve sacrifice on the part of seniors. He promised “responsible steps to strengthen” Social Security, which he has neglected throughout his first term. As to which steps those might be, not a word. “My plan will continue to reduce the carbon pollution that is heating our planet,” Mr. Obama said. What plan would that be? …

But the attractiveness of that vision made all the more frustrating Mr. Obama’s refusal to fill in any substance, his once again promising hard truths that he did not deliver. “They want your vote, but they don’t want you to know their plan,” he said of the Republicans. If Mr. Obama has a plan, Americans who listened Thursday don’t know how he would achieve it. [/b][/i]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ ... story.html

When you start loosing the Washington Post... you're loosing bad.

Whatever it is, it's more than the NON-EXISTENT specifics of the Twit/Lyin'-Ryan's agenda.

[youtube:3lackc0l][/youtube:3lackc0l]

Call that Mr. Romney's hazy agenda for a first term

"If we tell you what we'll do, we'll lose..."

Three posts by our resident socialist and not a single one of their comments have anything to do with the subject of this thread. They don't have answers... just like their Messiah Obama.

(and one of them... Lady Jazzer ("Whatever it is, it's more than...") is stupid enough to respond to nothing since she has me on ignore)

An acceptance speech is not a State of the Union laundry list of specific proposals. Its role is to set out a vision of the country’s future path.

Can't wait for the debates. :woo hoo:

Raees wrote:

An acceptance speech is not a State of the Union laundry list of specific proposals. Its role is to set out a vision of the country’s future path.

Can't wait for the debates. :woo hoo:

You'd better hope Obama the Messiah has something concrete to say at the debates, because right now, he's batting zero. The Washington Post is only one of many leftist outlets and/or commentators that think his acceptance speech was lame.

Why does the right always refer to President Obama as "Messiah"?? I've never understood that.

But I guess we'll refer to Romney as "His Highnes," if he is elected, so never mind.

Tell me Raees, where is the "better place" that Obama is planning on leading us to should we be unfortunate enough to be stuck with him for another 4 years? It's another Rorschach Test slogan - it can mean whatever one wishes it to mean without actually tying Obama down to any specific course of action. That is pretty much the extent of what Obama has shown himself to be stellar at - getting you to create a picture in your mind of what the words mean without obligating himself in any way to fulfilling what you envisioned he meant.

I have no interest in a tet a tet with you, PS, because no matter what I say or you say, neither one of us is going to change our mind about who we will vote for. It's just a waste of time.