Obama has balls on some issues.. the pirate thing, BIG balls... surprisingly Big.. (but HRC would have done the same AND it would n't have been surprising)..
Obama doesn't understand how to 'compromise' he only knows how to give them what they want, then start the dickering process.. that's where I say he has no balls. HRC and/or Bill would have started much lower and worked up to giving them some of what they want, but would have gotten a lot of what BC/HRC wanted in the deal also.
On the GITMO issue.. again, he is in the right.. but he's backing off because he can't play it politically...he could, but he won't even try... would Bill or HRC? I don't know.. I don't know that anyone would ever think she was weak on terrorists so I don't know that it would have been a problem..
the problem with Obama, going all the way back to the public option.. he won't stand up for what he and his party wants.. he did the same with the Bush tax cuts and he'll do the same with the shutdown.. he won't stand up for what he and his party wants.. of course he can't be seen as getting 'angry'.. imagine all the 'angry black man' comments then.. but he can be firm and let us stand with him, instead of letting us stand then selling us down the river in an effort to give the other side another win so he can look like he's compromising..
Bill and Hill didn't have to deal with the one thing Obama's dealing with. The Teabaggers and their insanity coupled with the resultant mass hysteria of the entire Republican Party. Back then, in the old days of Newt (as opposed to these new days of Newt), the Moral Majority and all that ilk were pussycats compared to the nutcases today.
Obama will do what he can with the budget to salvage social programs. Just like health care reform. Once the dems take over the House next year; and believe me, they will!, things can be righted.
