« Establishment extremism | Main | Polanski, the TU and the death of newspapers (with updates) »

October 02, 2009


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


I heard a rumor the president supposedly slept last night and perhaps even had a little chat with his wife. Talk about a slacker!

Mary Cafarelli

Quit pickin' on Obama, man!


Mary, if he hadn't gone and Chicago didn't get it, he would've been attacked for "not to stand up for America" or generally failing to be America's head cheerleader.


You do realize the President is able to multi-task, right?



I realize that you are understandably concerned because of people you know in that theater of combat, however...

Bush was heavily criticized for rushing into the Iraq aggression without fully fleshing out the potential consequences of an invasion and long-term occupation. This is an invasion you too hastily supported only to realize later on that it was an unwise decision.

Given that, are we really going to attack this president for taking his time and reviewing all the information before coming to an important, not-easily-revocable decision?

I do realize that you dislike perceived liberals and are not inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt, but don't let your desire to nitpick to cloud your judgment. He needs to make the right decision and half a day in Denmark isn't going to compromise that. And you know it.


Come to think of it, I'd think you should want him to take his time and make the right decision precisely BECAUSE you have someone you know in that theater of combat.

Bob Conner

The point is not that he shouldn't carefully consider before making important decisions, but that he should, and that he has less time to do so if he is constantly making unnecessary political trips and speeches.


Color me confused.

Bob, you're attacking the President claiming to do the very thing that he's not doing. What am I missing here?

Bob Conner

Obama got zero national press coverage for the substance of his speech at HVCC. He wasn't pushing a bill, so why was he wasting his time? If it was all about getting rid of Paterson, that's not a serious enough matter for him to be spending time on when there are very difficult and complicated decisions he must make about national security issues. Nor is the Olympics. And since the national press didn't cover him at HVCC, I wonder if that means he is taking other useless political trips around the country when, in my opinion, he should be concentrating on graver matters.


I could be wrong but I don't recall you criticizing Bush for being on vacation all the time while Iraq was going up in flames.

Bob Conner

Well this blog has only been going since last November, when Bush was almost out of office. I do think he and Rumsfeld screwed up Iraq policy up to November 2006 (and Afghanistan policy too by Iraq-related neglect). But I also think he and Gates were right about the "surge" in Iraq. I don't have a definite position now about what Obama should do in Afghanistan, where the apparent election fraud is problematic, but where withdrawal would be even more so. Obviously presidents have to spend time on various matters, such as Supreme Court nominations, economic policy and major legislation, but they also need to avoid spreading themselves too thin on minor stuff, as Obama arguably has been doing.


Gee, given all the recent controversy about whether Afghanistan will have a semi-legitimate government or one that stole an election, somehow Pres. Obama's path of taking his time, considering all the options, waiting to see how events transpire and trying to make the right decision doesn't quite seem to merit your snark nearly as much anymore...

Bob Conner

You persist is misstating what I wrote. I never said Obama should not take his time to decide what to do about Afghanistan. My objection was that he was spending too much time and energy on vastly less important matters, which obviously gives him less time to think and learn about crucial national security issues, about which he must at some point make decisions.


It would be incredibly reckless of him to make a decision until the fate of the next Afghan government is decided. Right now, he's rightly in holding pattern until it is decided who will be in charge of Afghanistan when whatever decision Obama makes takes effect and whether than government will have any popular legitimacy. That's a HUGE factor that plays into his decision but since it's unknown at this point, he's wise to wait to see what happens.

If I had the tiniest rational belief that one day in Denmark or a few hours in East Greenbush prevented him from making an expeditious decision on Afghanistan, I'd echo your sentiment. I expect the president to be able to do more than one thing at a time.


Obama was on several talk shows yesterday and, rumor has it, spent time with his family. No snarky denunciations of those wasted hours?

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

This blog is by Bob (Robert C.) Conner, a longtime journalist and author of the 2018 novel "The Last Circle of Ulysses Grant" published by Square Circle Press, and a 2013 biography "General Gordon Granger" published by Casemate. He is currently writing a biography of the Kansas abolitionist Col. James Montgomery. His Civil War blog can be found at robertcconnerauthor.blogspot.com
Bookmark and Share
Blog powered by Typepad

Become a Fan