Welch on Obama: It’s always someone else to blame with this guy

posted at 8:41 am on April 13, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Eh, what does this guy know about leadership, anyway?  He’s only the most widely respected CEO of the last twenty years or so and the founder of a school that develops leaders in the business world, plus the author of a book or two on the subject.  Former GE chief Jack Welch unloaded on Barack Obama yesterday for his chronic lack of leadership, manifest mainly through the ever-expanding universe of scapegoats that Obama cites for the failures of his economic policies.  Welch thinks that Obama has become positively Nixonian — or maybe worse (via Instapundit):

President Obama’s “divide-and-conquer” approach isn’t what great leaders do, Jack Welch said Thursday. …

“It was the insurance executives in health care. It was the bankers in the collapse. It was the oil companies as oil prices go up. It was Congress if things didn’t go the way he wanted. And recently it’s been the Supreme Court,” he said.

“He’s got an enemies list that would make Richard Nixon proud.”

Welch, who helmed GE for 21 years and founded the Jack Welch Management Institute at Strayer University, penned an op-ed article for Reuters with wife Suzy Welch this week in which he tackled the idea of Obama’s enemies list.

“Surely his supporters must think this particular tactic is effective, but there can be no denying that the country is more polarized than when Obama took office,” Welch wrote, making a case for presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney.

“Great leaders don’t divide,” Welch insisted to Larry Kudlow, and compared Romney’s record in Massachusetts as the model of consensus over Obama’s “divisiveness.”  Welch had elaborated on this argument earlier in the week with his Reuters column:

Over the past three years, Obama has taken a sort of divide-and-conquer approach, amassing a list of enemies that would make Richard Nixon proud – bankers, healthcare insurance providers, oil companies, wealthy taxpayers, Congress and, most recently, the Supreme Court. Surely his supporters must think this particular tactic is effective, but there can be no denying that the country is more polarized than when Obama took office.

Without doubt, Romney is not the model leader (his apparent lack of authenticity can be jarring), but he has a quality that would serve him well as president – good old American pragmatism. Perhaps that’s the businessman in him. Or perhaps you just learn to do what you’ve got to do when you’re a GOP governor in the People’s Republic of Massachusetts or the man charged with salvaging the scandal-ridden Salt Lake City Olympics. If Romney’s long record suggests anything, it’s that he knows how to manage people and organizations to get things accomplished without a lot of internecine warfare.

Look, Obama may be a great campaigner and Romney (to date) somewhat the opposite. But neither man is running to be Campaigner-in-Chief.

In politics, as in business, the leader’s job needs to be filled by a leader, and no effective leader, regardless of ideology, keeps an enemies list.

As it happens, I made this same exact point in another context yesterday when talking with a friend about Romney’s list of potential running mates.  I suggested that Rick Perry might not be a bad choice, although I’m not sure Perry would be interested in the job.  My friend wondered whether Romney would still hold a grudge against Perry for the Texas governor’s sharp attacks last fall and then for his endorsement of Newt Gingrich, but I replied that Romney’s business sense would have him focused on the business choice, not the personal choice, for his running mate.  If Perry made the most sense, then Romney would pick Perry; if Bobby Jindal, who endorsed Perry, makes more sense, it will be Jindal.  Heck, if Romney thought he could win the election by putting Rick Santorum on the ticket, he’d do it.

That’s the difference that Welch points out in his column and his CNBC appearance.  The long-time legislator Obama is only interested in making pitches and divisions; the long-time executive Romney is interested in getting things done.

Update: I wrote “Perry” once where I meant “Jindal.”  I’ve fixed it above.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

The whole basis of the left is divide and conquer.

rob verdi on April 13, 2012 at 8:46 AM

President Obama’s “divide-and-conquer” approach isn’t what great leaders do, Jack Welch said Thursday. …

That’s all Leftist “leaders” know how to do.

They never have solutions, just gripes and enemies.

mankai on April 13, 2012 at 8:46 AM

What is there to say….
Obama is a dufus President.

It’s right there…in his resume.

Electrongod on April 13, 2012 at 8:47 AM

It’s always someone else to blame with this guy

That’s exactly what Roger Ailes said about Keith Olbermann yesterday:

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/04/12/Ailes-On-Olbermanns-Future-Itll-Be-A-Pet-Show-In-St-Louis-Or-Something

Pass-the-buck: a leftist characteristic.

itsnotaboutme on April 13, 2012 at 8:47 AM

Well, that’s the Progressive ideology in a nutshell, is it not? Someone, anyone, everyone else is to blame for societal ills. Progressive policy (whether practiced by Dems of Lefty Repubs) can never exacerbate problems, in the mind of the Left.

So, in that sense, Obama is just staying true to his Progressive roots. Nothing bad could possibly result from his ideology. He is a “good” guy. Therefore because things are getting worse, especially for the poor, “minorites,” and the “middle class,” despite our overall drift to the Left over the past 80 years, well, that just can’t be the fault of “good intentions.”

visions on April 13, 2012 at 8:48 AM

Barry’s list of enemies is so extensive he must constantly hide on vacation and on the golf course so that they can’t find him.

Yoop on April 13, 2012 at 8:48 AM

How’d they get to Immelt from this guy?

BigWyo on April 13, 2012 at 8:49 AM

Bolsheviks in Russia, Fascists in Italy, National Socialists in Germany, Mao in China, Castro and Che in Cuba, the entire Arab Spring… none of them had any sort of reasoned economic plan to offer… they just created enemies, whipped up emotions of hate and jealousy and rode that wave to power.

This is the strategy of the Left.

No surprise a Maoist like Obama does the same.

mankai on April 13, 2012 at 8:50 AM

But neither man is running to be Campaigner-in-Chief.

I would contest this claim with regard to one of the candidates. Three guesses as to which one. (Hint: not Romney.)

Mr. Prodigy on April 13, 2012 at 8:51 AM

This nation could use a public leader like Jack Welch – in government

jake-the-goose on April 13, 2012 at 8:51 AM

If Perry made the most sense, then Romney would pick Perry; if Bobby Jindal, who endorsed Perry, makes more sense, it will be Perry.

Is this a typo? Because otherwise, I’m not certain I understand the point here. Bobby Jindal is very much in the mix, and if Romney wants Jindal – as I think he could – I believe Jindal would accept. He has said on occasion “I have the job I want,” but has always stopped short of the outright denials of somebody like Rubio.

Gingotts on April 13, 2012 at 8:52 AM

That’s exactly what Roger Ailes said about Keith Olbermann yesterday
(. . .)

itsnotaboutme on April 13, 2012 at 8:47 AM

Obama/Olbermann 2012. Because two zeroes are better than one.

Dextrous on April 13, 2012 at 8:52 AM

It’s definitely time for this line of attack.

Obama may have gotten the benefit of the doubt during the “debt ceiling” nonsense, but the pattern has continued since then and he’s always the common denominator. He fights with everybody, blames everyone and anyone for everything, and has a nasty habit of demonizing private citizens and now the Court. The media can’t cover for him. He’s the source of the problem.

forest on April 13, 2012 at 8:54 AM

Welch needs to castigate the companies that took his 10-70-20 rating plan and implemented it as a way to punish and intimidate employees… but I digress.

He’s absolutely right. Our disrupter-in-chief claims he’s for ending divisiveness, yet everything he does is the opposite. He campaigns on it (e.g., “fair share”), he acts on it… it goes on and on. And nothing is ever his own fault.

sadatoni on April 13, 2012 at 8:54 AM

Obama’s reelection strategery does beg the question, what exactly is his plan if he somehow suckers 50.1% of the electorate into giving him another 4 years? Even if the GOP retakes the Senate, Obama can’t spend the next term just lashing out at them. He has to get things done. How exactly does he propose to do that when his entire Presidency thus far has consisted of strawman arguments and buckpassing?

Doughboy on April 13, 2012 at 8:54 AM

A narcissist really has no true friends or allies…everybody is eligible for a turn under the bus…

PatriotRider on April 13, 2012 at 8:55 AM

Gingotts on April 13, 2012 at 8:52 AM

I think Ed meant Jindal there, not Perry, from the context.

jwolf on April 13, 2012 at 8:57 AM

Obama/Olbermann 2012. Because two zeroes are better than one.

Dextrous on April 13, 2012 at 8:52 AM

Are you saying the sum of the parts is greater than the whole? (or a-hole?)

swinia sutki on April 13, 2012 at 8:58 AM

Gingotts on April 13, 2012 at 8:52 AM

I just got the names screwed up. I’ve fixed it.

Ed Morrissey on April 13, 2012 at 8:58 AM

It’s definitely time for this line of attack.

Obama may have gotten the benefit of the doubt during the “debt ceiling” nonsense, but the pattern has continued since then and he’s always the common denominator. He fights with everybody, blames everyone and anyone for everything, and has a nasty habit of demonizing private citizens and now the Court. The media can’t cover for him. He’s the source of the problem.

forest on April 13, 2012 at 8:54 AM

The problem is it’s a “personal” type attack and the Romney campaign and RNC have shown a marked desire to stay away from anything other than vanilla policy criticism. This statement by Welch, combined with someone reading a list of people Obama blames for his problems, would make an excellent attack ad, but I doubt it will ever get made.

Doomberg on April 13, 2012 at 8:58 AM

I remarked to my Dad the other day that you know the world is bass-ackwards when you teenaged children are better at personal accountability than your President is. Obama is a petulant joke surrounded by enablers. He is shamefully immature.

CantCureStupid on April 13, 2012 at 8:59 AM

***What is ANYONE doing talking about Obama during this campaign season? helllllllooooo.

Everyone in the media has gotten the email from the DNC and the GATES OF HELL Obama Re-Elect machine that there should be a DAILY OUTRAGE and it should revolve around Trayvon, the gop WAR on women, or Sandra Fluke or Rosen or the super rich like Romney and how intolerant Catholics are not wanting to give Condoms out during Communion!!!!!

Get this Welch guy off the radar screens.

***DNC email contents?

PappyD61 on April 13, 2012 at 8:59 AM

If Mitt were to pick Santorum for VP, that would help to bring the conservative wing of the party behind him. I think it’s quite likely.

A more daring (i.e. controversial) choice would be to pick Newt. Many conservatives have problems with Newt, but he would be fantastic on the stump, and could serve as a valuable well of ideas when the two of them are in office.

MrLynn on April 13, 2012 at 9:00 AM

Update: I wrote “Perry” once where I meant “Jindal.” I’ve fixed it above.

I still don’t know who you’re talking about. I know three people named Bobby Jindal…

forest on April 13, 2012 at 9:01 AM

Without doubt, Romney is not the model leader (his apparent lack of authenticity can be jarring), but he has a quality that would serve him well as president – good old American pragmatism.

Why isn’t this guy writing Romney’s campaign material?

cozmo on April 13, 2012 at 9:01 AM

Romney picking Perry would be a reprise of GHWB choosing Quayle.

Romney will pick someone who will enhance the ticket and keep the focus where it needs to be – on Obama’s pathetic economic record.

He will not pick someone who for all of his good qualities will say something idiotic like 78 to 81 of the Democrat members of the House are communists (as opposied to socialists). [This has been a tough election cycle for Sarah Palin.]

The phenomena of pundits who don’t appreciate Romney’s strengths giving him political advice is a source of amusement.

Basilsbest on April 13, 2012 at 9:01 AM

Having worked for Jack for many years implementing his initiatives at GE I can only say that he is one of the sharpest business leaders I have ever worked with.
I only wish he would speak up more regarding the bumbling socialist Obama.

ObamatheMessiah on April 13, 2012 at 9:01 AM

That’s the difference that Welch points out in his column and his CNBC appearance. The long-time legislator community organizer Obama is only interested in making pitches and divisions…

FIFY

I think that this ugly trait of pitting one group against another really does come from his days of community organizing. Community organizer is just a polite way to say community agitator. It’s what they do. And it’s what Obama continues to do.

rogaineguy on April 13, 2012 at 9:02 AM

I just got the names screwed up. I’ve fixed it.

Ed Morrissey on April 13, 2012 at 8:58 AM

Cool, that’s what I figured, but wasn’t certain…. In that case, definitely agreed with the point.

Gingotts on April 13, 2012 at 9:02 AM

What is there to say….
Obama is a dufus President.

It’s right there…in his resume.

Electrongod on April 13, 2012 at 8:47 AM

….and how many people have the Media ‘Falsify’ their resume for them?
(&…I love Jack Welch!)

KOOLAID2 on April 13, 2012 at 9:03 AM

President Obama’s “divide-and-conquer” approach isn’t what great leaders do, Jack Welch said Thursday. …

“Great leaders don’t divide,” Welch insisted

Obama divides. Ergo, … what those of us who were paying attention knew well before Nov. 2008.

IrishEyes on April 13, 2012 at 9:05 AM

If Mitt were to pick Santorum for VP, that would help to bring the conservative wing of the party behind him. I think it’s quite likely.

About as likely as him choosing Hilary Rosen. He’s not an idiot.

Marcus on April 13, 2012 at 9:06 AM

penned an op-ed article for Reuters with wife Suzy Welch this week in which he tackled the idea of Obama’s enemies list.

What does she know about economics? Probably never worked a day in her life. – Hilary with one l

Lost in Jersey on April 13, 2012 at 9:06 AM

Without doubt, Romney is not the model leader (his apparent lack of authenticity can be jarring), but he has a quality that would serve him well as president – good old American pragmatism.

Well… It was pragmatism (the philosophy articulated by William James, among others) without regard for constitutionalist first principles that eventually gave us progressivism and the ever-growing state. Let’s hope that a President Romney’s “pragmatism” is guided by a conservative Congress.

*(“President Romney.” The name does have a certain ring to it…)

irishspy on April 13, 2012 at 9:08 AM

How’d they get to Immelt from this guy?

BigWyo on April 13, 2012 at 8:49 AM

Oddly enough – Welch hand picked Immelt – due to his medical industry knowledge – which is a huge growth portion of GE.

Welch is brilliant, however – the notion that someone “like you” will perform like you, when they are at the helm is a result of Six Sigma (developed by Motorloa – popularized by Welch’s adoption and anherence at GE), MBA’s, programs that have become popular – and commoditized whereas anyone can achieve them with money – or company sponsorship.

How well they perform as a whole is a crapshoot.

Odie1941 on April 13, 2012 at 9:08 AM

I served in the Navy over 20 years and I never once heard a Commanding Officer blame someone else in public. It makes him sound incredibly weak. Here he is, supposedly the most powerful man in the world and there are dozens of people out there, tripping him up on a daily basis.

How can anyone respect him? You can respect the position, but the man himself, is a mouse.

Secondly, this guy singles out and demonizes Americans with an antipathy and thinly veiled hatred that you never see him even slightly approach, when he’s talking about our enemies or terrorists.

NoDonkey on April 13, 2012 at 9:09 AM

Romney picking Perry would be a reprise of GHWB choosing Quayle.

Basilsbest on April 13, 2012 at 9:01 AM

While Perry had issues in the primary, even at his nadir he was nowhere as bad as Quayle. Furthermore, that was a result of him being on painkiller meds and not at his best.

If Mitt were to pick Santorum for VP, that would help to bring the conservative wing of the party behind him. I think it’s quite likely.

MrLynn on April 13, 2012 at 9:00 AM

Despite what Romney said, I doubt Santorum’s being looked at. He was simply the last person standing who the Tea Party turned to to stop Romney. I doubt he has a lot of appeal beyond that.

Doomberg on April 13, 2012 at 9:09 AM

But neither man is running to be Campaigner-in-Chief.

Sadly, Øbummer thought this was the job all along.

IrishEyes on April 13, 2012 at 9:10 AM

The long-time legislator Obama…”

Long-time? Really? 7 years of voting ‘present’ in the Illinois senate does not make one a ‘long-time legislator’. What’s he ever legislated?

Trafalgar on April 13, 2012 at 9:10 AM

Or perhaps you just learn to do what you’ve got to do when you’re a GOP governor in the People’s Republic of Massachusetts ……

I kind of got a kick out of that line from Welch’s article in Reuters you cited.

DaveDief on April 13, 2012 at 9:11 AM

About as likely as him choosing Hilary Rosen. He’s not an idiot.

Marcus on April 13, 2012 at 9:06 AM

Which Hilary Rosen? I personally know 17 people called Hilary Rosen.

Trafalgar on April 13, 2012 at 9:12 AM

The long-time legislator AGITATOR Obama…

fixed

mankai on April 13, 2012 at 9:12 AM

Obama unable to actually accomplish anything? Is this unexpected from a guy who has never run so much as a lemonade stand? If only someone had told us about this back in 2008 … oh wait, that’s right: we did!

Jeez, I must have said that a hundred times in the last few months. It’s kind of pathetic.

lovesthesun on April 13, 2012 at 9:13 AM

Bobby Jindal is very much in the mix, and if Romney wants Jindal – as I think he could – I believe Jindal would accept. He has said on occasion “I have the job I want,” but has always stopped short of the outright denials of somebody like Rubio.

Gingotts on April 13, 2012 at 8:52 AM

I wouldn’t be surprised if Mr. Jindal was ready to sign on. His political career has always been looking up and forward.

I believe there were two reasons he wasn’t willing to accept a veep slot back in 08 if McCain had truly wanted him: Jindal had just gotten elected as governor and I suspect he’d have gotten hit hard by the left for resigning his governorship effectively a year in. Secondly, the l.g. was Mitch Landrieu, Democrat and brother to Mary. I think it was plainly clear that Mitch wanted to be governor and had Jindal stepped down, Mitch would have become governor.

Now, four years later, Jindal’s won re-election and Mitch ran for and won the mayorship of New Orleans – which his father had held years ago. I don’t see Mitch going any where. He’s probably perfectly fine with New Orleans. Also, the current l.g. is a Republican, Jay Dardenne.

So I’m going to guess that if Jindal’s thinking about being veep, he’s probably more willing to accept a nod because he’s got a better hand of cards now than he did four years ago.

Heh… and while the media and left would trot out Jindal’s horrible Republican response speech he gave several years ago, all it will take is the veep debate with Biden to end that derision. Of course, it doesn’t take much to take Biden down in a debate.

Logus on April 13, 2012 at 9:13 AM

How’d they get to Immelt from this guy?

BigWyo on April 13, 2012 at 8:49 AM

Immelt is starting to figure it out:

Friends describe Immelt as privately dismayed that, even after three years on the job, President Obama hasn’t moved to the center, but instead further left. The GE CEO, I’m told, is appalled by everything from the president’s class-warfare rhetoric to his continued belief that big government is the key to economic salvation.

Fallon on April 13, 2012 at 9:18 AM

There is video of Santorum yelling that Romney is “the WORST Republican candidate there is!!!” and I have to laugh at his supporters thinking Romney would consider him like he’s Ronald Reagan or something. He isn’t on any “short list” or ANY list.

Marcus on April 13, 2012 at 9:19 AM

Nixon’s “enemy list” was just what the media called the people he didn’t invite to parties.

And now they’re comparing THAT to what Obama is doing? Orwell would be impressed.

logis on April 13, 2012 at 9:20 AM

*(“President Romney.” The name does have a certain ring to it…)

irishspy on April 13, 2012 at 9:08 AM

Sounds more like a thud than a ring. Not like the sound of horse sh!t hitting pavement that “President Obama” congers, but still…

swinia sutki on April 13, 2012 at 9:20 AM

served in the Navy over 20 years and I never once heard a Commanding Officer blame someone else in public. It makes him sound incredibly weak. Here he is, supposedly the most powerful man in the world and there are dozens of people out there, tripping him up on a daily basis.

NoDonkey on April 13, 2012 at 9:09 AM

Good point.

I think a big part of Barry’s problem is the fact that he has been told his entire life that he is a victim because of the color of his skin.

When a person always thinks of himself as a victim, it’s probably hard not to believe that others are to blame for one’s problems.

AZCoyote on April 13, 2012 at 9:22 AM

Hmmmm, comparing Nixon and his “supposed list” to this guy??

Sorry, but this guy is very small next to Nixon, irregardless
of what we think of that man…..

..I’ve felt for a long time now that Obama is the little
Gremlin in the Family Circus comic strip…you know
the “not me” gremlin…..

ToddPA on April 13, 2012 at 9:24 AM

If i’m not mistaken, divide and conquer was stalin’s leadership style

aniptofar on April 13, 2012 at 9:28 AM

There is video of Santorum yelling that Romney is “the WORST Republican candidate there is!!!”.

Marcus on April 13, 2012 at 9:19 AM

Dude … he dropped out. Why you still mis-quoting him?

let.it.go.

Lost in Jersey on April 13, 2012 at 9:29 AM

FYI all you Jindal and Rubio fans, they’re ineligilble. They are not Natural Born Citizens. Let’s not repeat the insult to the Constitution that the Democrats perpetuated in 2008.

soghornetgunner on April 13, 2012 at 9:32 AM

In leadership psychology parlance, Jack Welch is what is called a “transformational leader” one who changes the mindset of employees, empowers them to make changes, and they take on the dream as their own. They leave the place of business and the vision survives. Steve Jobs, Jack Welch, Lee Iacocca (for a while anyway), Ronald Reagan.

Barak Obama is a “charismatic leader”, one who must lead from crisis, is the sole holder of the vision, and whose vision is more important than the people implementing the vision. Communism uses charismatic leaders. Usually the vision dies when the leader does, or is removed. Let’s hope so.

itsspideyman on April 13, 2012 at 9:32 AM

Obama is not a doofus, he is a Gorbachev clone. He is a smiling Marxist who will not stop at anything for a second term. He is bent on a way to get what he desires, no matter what it takes. He gets another term, say good-bye to our way of life.

mike0993 on April 13, 2012 at 9:32 AM

That’s what community organizer’s do.

Wigglesworth on April 13, 2012 at 9:33 AM

let.it.go.

Lost in Jersey on April 13, 2012 at 9:29 AM

Some cannot. To the detriment of Romney.

That, or they are 0bama plants.

cozmo on April 13, 2012 at 9:33 AM

scratch the apostrophe in my last comment

Wigglesworth on April 13, 2012 at 9:33 AM

The GOP needs to prepare itself to fight dirty, and hard, and long, and give no quarter to their enemy.

rplat on April 13, 2012 at 9:34 AM

I think a big part of Barry’s problem is the fact that he has been told his entire life that he is a victim because of the color of his skin.

Absolutely.

That’s why he tends to do things half-ass. Someone’s always been there to clean up his mess and if they are unable to, he has an excuse for why he didn’t get the job done.

He’s never shouldered the blame for any of his serial failures.

Then again, if he were aware of how absolutely mediocre he is, he never would have had the condfidence to get to where he is. How that benefits the rest of us, I don’t know.

NoDonkey on April 13, 2012 at 9:34 AM

soghornetgunner on April 13, 2012 at 9:32 AM

Bless your heart.

Are you with the dante faction, or the emperor faction?

cozmo on April 13, 2012 at 9:34 AM

Down in these parts he’s known as The Oblamer.Not fondly either.

docflash on April 13, 2012 at 9:35 AM

Romney picking Perry would be a reprise of GHWB choosing Quayle.

Basilsbest on April 13, 2012 at 9:01 AM

While Perry had issues in the primary, even at his nadir he was nowhere as bad as Quayle. Furthermore, that was a result of him being on painkiller meds and not at his best.

If Mitt were to pick Santorum for VP, that would help to bring the conservative wing of the party behind him. I think it’s quite likely.

MrLynn on April 13, 2012 at 9:00 AM

I’m not saying that either Quayle or Perry are stupid. Both are quite bright and good men. What I am saying is that – like it or not, and I detest it – the MSM controls the narrative. The running mate’s intelligence and lack of extremism must
be so clear they can’t make those things an issue. Jindal would be an excellent choice.

Basilsbest on April 13, 2012 at 9:35 AM

FYI all you Jindal and Rubio fans, they’re ineligilble. They are not Natural Born Citizens. Let’s not repeat the insult to the Constitution that the Democrats perpetuated in 2008.

soghornetgunner on April 13, 2012 at 9:32 AM

O Mighty Ed, could you please add some light to whether this is true or not? I’ve bounced around many websites with both sides arguing logically about this issue.

Are they elligble or not?

itsspideyman on April 13, 2012 at 9:36 AM

Why you still mis-quoting him?

let.it.go.

Lost in Jersey on April 13, 2012 at 9:29 AM

I saw it with my own eyes this morning. If they took him out of context, they did a damn good job of it.

Marcus on April 13, 2012 at 9:38 AM

has Obama ever actually met with the house leaders to work on joint legislation?

he knows he has the complicit media to blame the Republicans for stalemating any ‘effective’ legislation

audiotom on April 13, 2012 at 9:40 AM

Are they elligble or not?

itsspideyman on April 13, 2012 at 9:36 AM

They are

Only birther nutballs are still screeching about this.

cozmo on April 13, 2012 at 9:41 AM

How often have leaders overtly promoted the virtues of Socialism and large centralized government? Don’t they always use the language of Democracy and Republicanism to run for office?

The Left is fundamentally dishonest because, for whatever reason, they feel the need to hide their true intentions. Even Alinsky is all about hiding rather than leading.

Obama just happens to be good at hiding, lying, double-speaking, and dividing. This is what you get with an exceptional Socialist: exceptionally bad governance.

You can accuse him all day long about not exerting leadership and in his small brain he will take it as a compliment.

EMD on April 13, 2012 at 9:42 AM

Obama/Olbermann 2012. Because two zeroes are better than one.

Dextrous on April 13, 2012 at 8:52 AM

Wait, I thought you couldn’t divide by zero. But maybe with two…yes, multiply by two first, then divide. I’ll run it by Stevie Chu and get back to you.

Barnestormer on April 13, 2012 at 9:42 AM

Gee, Jack, maybe you should have been smart enough to see through the BS and NOT HAVE VOTED FOR HIM!!!

kjl291 on April 13, 2012 at 9:43 AM

If Jack Welch questions your leadership ability…..

BobMbx on April 13, 2012 at 9:44 AM

Some cannot. To the detriment of Romney.

That, or they are 0bama plants.

cozmo on April 13, 2012 at 9:33 AM

It’s too bad really. Just when I’m starting to come to grips with a Willard candidacy, some of his supporters go and cloud the issue.

Lost in Jersey on April 13, 2012 at 9:50 AM

Lost in Jersey on April 13, 2012 at 9:50 AM

Toughen up, they ain’t Romney and they are mostly harmless…mostly.

cozmo on April 13, 2012 at 9:57 AM

I wouldn’t be surprised if Mr. Jindal was ready to sign on. His political career has always been looking up and forward.

I’m thinking that Jindal will end up being the choice to run Health and Human Services if Romney gets elected, not be VP.

The VP slot is of questionable value, while the HHS post will be a very important one as he dismantles ObamaCare and health care reform has always been his pet issue, going back to when he was a House staffer in the early 90s.

teke184 on April 13, 2012 at 9:59 AM

How about THIS guy for VP?

I loves me some Jack Welch.

rockmom on April 13, 2012 at 10:00 AM

O Mighty Ed, could you please add some light to whether this is true or not? I’ve bounced around many websites with both sides arguing logically about this issue.

Are they elligble or not?

Jindal and Rubio are absolutely and completely 100% eligible. They were both born in the United States, as natural-born citizens (as opposed to naturalized).

It’s not even Birthers as a whole who don’t believe they are eligible — it’s a FRINGE of the Birthers who hold to a weird, non-legal and non-constitutional interpretation in order to skirt around the uncomfortable reality of Obama’s birth certificate. The idea behind these people’s logic is that they want to be able to say that Obama was a prior ineligible, that we don’t need to be debating about such things as missing birth certificates, etc., because based only on what we already KNOW he’s ineligible. And for the sake of consistency they extend their analysis to anyone else who falls under the same criterion.

That’s right: a fringe of a fringe.

Actually, Ed should probably ban the guy who raised that point originally. Do we tolerate Birthers here?

Esoteric on April 13, 2012 at 10:00 AM

Gee, Jack, maybe you should have been smart enough to see through the BS and NOT HAVE VOTED FOR HIM!!!

kjl291 on April 13, 2012 at 9:43 AM

With fairly high certainty, I can say that Jack Welsh didn’t vote for Obama. Jeffrey Immelt, current CEO of GE may have but not Jack.

Jack WELCH, former CEO of GE said on Kudlow that ‘I don’t know how any businessman could (come out or vote) for Obama.

Fallon on April 13, 2012 at 10:03 AM

Update: I wrote “Perry” once where I meant “Jindal.” I’ve fixed it above.

I still don’t know who you’re talking about. I know three people named Bobby Jindal…

forest on April 13, 2012 at 9:01 AM

….Heh!!!!

Baxter Greene on April 13, 2012 at 10:06 AM

Actually, Ed should probably ban the guy who raised that point originally. Do we tolerate Birthers here?

Esoteric on April 13, 2012 at 10:00 AM

There are a couple of different factions of the “fringe fringe” here. They start on the same side and very quickly plunge into attacking each other about whose definition is the “real” fringe definition.

They are fun in a puppy chasing it’s tail sort of way.

cozmo on April 13, 2012 at 10:07 AM

Obama’s reelection strategery does beg the question, what exactly is his plan if he somehow suckers 50.1% of the electorate into giving him another 4 years? Even if the GOP retakes the Senate, Obama can’t spend the next term just lashing out at them. He has to get things done. How exactly does he propose to do that when his entire Presidency thus far has consisted of strawman arguments and buckpassing?

Doughboy on April 13, 2012 at 8:54 AM

The Executive Order pen will go into hyperdrive.

“Congress? What Congress? Never heard of it.”

Bitter Clinger on April 13, 2012 at 10:15 AM

Well I’d like to address the post here if he wins the 50.1% retard vote and gets anotehr 4 years

I predict the following:

Repubs win the senate, keep the house

America is paralyzed for 4 years, as there is NOTHING this Obozo will do but demonize them; not a pragmatic bone in this guy’s body

and 5 Trillion + more in debt by 2016;

Total US debt 20+ Trillion, and a mjor hole to fix by Repub president Chris Christie and VP Rick Perry.

TC
J

Gauthijm on April 13, 2012 at 10:16 AM

The only thing that came from Jeff Immelt was his driving GE stock right into the ground…sold GE every year for my annual $3K capital loss allowance…and where does he end up–with Obama as co-captain of the Titanic..

hillsoftx on April 13, 2012 at 10:21 AM

How’d they get to Immelt from this guy?

BigWyo on April 13, 2012 at 8:49 AM

Oddly enough – Welch hand picked Immelt – due to his medical industry knowledge – which is a huge growth portion of GE.
Odie1941 on April 13, 2012 at 9:08 AM

Gee, Jack, maybe you should have been smart enough to see through the BS and NOT HAVE VOTED FOR HIM!!!

kjl291 on April 13, 2012 at 9:43 AM

Immelt seems to be having 2nd thoughts.

I doubt that Welch voted for Obama. Where did you get that information?

Vince on April 13, 2012 at 10:23 AM

One weird question I have is;;

I know teh Press is IN the tank for him, but how come, such an unsympathetic rabble rouser as this is seen by most americans as a “nicer” person than he truly is

I DON’t understand it!

Every poll shows this, he’s “liked” more, “nice” is more used to desbribe him, than all the others.. HUH ?

help!
J

Gauthijm on April 13, 2012 at 10:25 AM

I still don’t know who you’re talking about. I know three people named Bobby Jindal…

forest on April 13, 2012 at 9:01 AM

Too funny!

College Prof on April 13, 2012 at 10:25 AM

Obama’s one pre-politics management experience was managing the Annenberg Challenge. He spent millions of Other Peoples’ Money (hey, that’s all he knows) and managed it into a smoking crater. The schools that the money was supposed to go to improve came out worse at the end then when he started.

Everything about this man screams that Obama is a lazy, bumbling, self-aggrandizing ideologue. That 52% of American voters could have been fooled by him is just appalling.

Cicero43 on April 13, 2012 at 10:27 AM

We already know that if Obama gets a second term, he will have more flexibility. I assume he means he’ll be able to stick his head farther up his a**.

College Prof on April 13, 2012 at 10:28 AM

It’s definitely time for this line of attack.

It will be, but Romney’s team is going to wait for him to go back to that well once more. Otherwise, it’s a non-sequitur.

Right now, it’s Team Barry’s scattershot attacks.

Ace has it right when he wrote 0 is focused on weekly memes and daily media hype; it’s his attempt to run out the clock. He does this every time he’s trying to slide something pass the electorate.

If he feels his has momentum – job reports, gas prices drop – we’ll start hearing the “Can’t Wait Any Longer” mantra variants.

That’s why has has an enemies list; people who can actually slow him down are not doing so out of good conscience or intent. Only he is.

budfox on April 13, 2012 at 10:33 AM

GE chief Jack Welch unloaded on Barack Obama yesterday for his chronic lack of leadership,

Someone give this man a megaphone.

lynncgb on April 13, 2012 at 10:33 AM

Take a look at all the arguments from the Lefties on this site. It’s always the same thing. Not my responsibility, not my fault. Blame others. We’re oppressed. Because self-improvement requires WORK! Oh, the humanity! What a road to take in life. Pathetic. And so un-American.

RobertMN on April 13, 2012 at 10:37 AM

The problem with stories like this is, that the Left doesn’t care. They absolutely do not care that Obama is terrible leader or that Jack Welch thinks Obama is a terrible leader.

They do not care if Obama divides the country to get what he wants. They just simply do not care. They care about one thing, and one thing only: their progressive liberal agenda. The ends justify the means for them. To the point where they carry Obama’s water and defend him, NO MATTER WHAT.

Start an illegal war with Lybia without Congressional consent? No problem.

Ram an unconstitutional, highly partisan healthcare plan that 65% of the population doesn’t want, through Congress by every trick known to congress? No problem.

Class warfare? No problem.

Billions wasted on green projects marred by cronyism? No problem.

High unemployment? Needs more time.

Lies, falsehoods? Your side does it too.

High gas prices? No problem.

It’s just an endless parade of poor leadership and bad results from the WH and they keep marching on, like mindless drones. Jack Welch thinks Obama is a poor leader? The only people that care or heed his words are the people who already knew this. The Left are too far up the One’s backside to care a whit what Jack Welch thinks.

It’s amusing.

Fish on April 13, 2012 at 10:43 AM

Obama/Olbermann 2012. Because two zeroes are better than one.

Dextrous on April 13, 2012 at 8:52 AM

O_o

Kenosha Kid on April 13, 2012 at 10:46 AM

…and compared Romney’s record in Massachusetts as the model of consensus over Obama’s “divisiveness.”

Well. There you have it: The Romney campaign’s ‘King Plank’. Run on it – it’s very long.

Tsar of Earth on April 13, 2012 at 10:53 AM

On the subject of the blame game, have you heard that Chicago Mayor “tiny dancer” Rahmbo is blaming previous mayor Rich Daley for the uptick in homicides during Rahmbo’s first year as mayor? Chicago on the Potomac has returned to the midwest as the DC on Lake Michigan. And Oblamesomeoneelse can’t assume the responsibility for even the GSA-gaffe which happened on his watch and is therefore his responsibility. They may not all be trained dancers like Rahmbo, but they’re all good at the pirouette à la seconde grande–just a large whirl and spin.

stukinIL4now on April 13, 2012 at 10:59 AM

The one clear, consistent feature I have seen of the Obama presidency is the constant whining and blaming of everyone else for everything negative that occurs. This guy is a classless loser and it is displayed every day with his incredible lack of leadership. I can’t even listen to him speak anymore because of the dreck that continually spews forth from his mouth.

And playing on racial tensions, fake “women’s issues”, and the fears of the lazy loser/taker classes to get elected is really classy there, dude. If that is all you got left for a base then God help you, even if you get reelected.

Jimmy Carter? Richard Nixon? Forget the comparisons. This man is in a class all by himself.

What an embarrassment.

AttaBoyLuther on April 13, 2012 at 11:13 AM

I think a big part of Barry’s problem is the fact that he has been told his entire life that he is a victim because of the color of his skin.
Absolutely.

That’s why he tends to do things half-ass. Someone’s always been there to clean up his mess and if they are unable to, he has an excuse for why he didn’t get the job done.

He’s never shouldered the blame for any of his serial failures.

Then again, if he were aware of how absolutely mediocre he is, he never would have had the condfidence to get to where he is. How that benefits the rest of us, I don’t know.

NoDonkey on April 13, 2012 at 9:34 AM

It doesn’t benefit the rest of us. Obama has been given a free ride his entire life based on his skin color. He is a person of few ideas and little understanding or intellectual curiosity. He has adopted every liberal concept that was spoon fed to him during his ivy league education. He is incapable of comprehending that these concepts are false. He will continue to pursue them because he cannot conceive of an alternative. We are in big trouble if he is re-elected.

long-time executive Romney is interested in getting things done.

It’s about time to get a competent grown-up back in charge.

talkingpoints on April 13, 2012 at 11:20 AM

It’s amusing.

Fish on April 13, 2012 at 10:43 AM

I fear you’re correct….and I’m not amused.

freedomfirst on April 13, 2012 at 11:35 AM

MrLynn on April 13, 2012 at 9:00 AM

Santorum is not a true conservative, he is a social conservative.

And, if Romney picks him, I would seriously think about not voting for Romney. As the first decision I judge with a Nominee is their VP choice.

I sure hope it is Perry. I’ll win the bet I had with a friend over lunch last September.

That being said, can we put aside the hog wash that Santorum and Gingrich are the true Conservatives, please? Please?

uhangtight on April 13, 2012 at 11:56 AM

Obama has been given a free ride his entire life based on his skin color. He is a person of few ideas and little understanding or intellectual curiosity. He has adopted every liberal concept that was spoon fed to him during his ivy league education. He is incapable of comprehending that these concepts are false. He will continue to pursue them because he cannot conceive of an alternative. We are in big trouble if he is re-elected.

talkingpoints on April 13, 2012 at 11:20 AM

On that subject, you might want to read this;

http://pjmedia.com/zombie/2012/04/12/teaching-as-a-subversive-activity-the-theory-of-political-indoctrination/

And especially this;

http://www.nas.org/images/documents/A_Crisis_of_Competence.pdf

Obama is an inevitable result of the disconnect between academia and the real world that has occurred since the 1960s.

Marxism, socialism, “liberation theology”, and every other “-ism” that has failed miserably in the world for the last two centuries thrives on our college campuses today. And does so to the point of driving out actual scholarship, to say nothing of rational thought.

The last time this happened in academia, was during the early Renaissance. At that time, the universities in Europe were dominated by the Catholic Church, and as such there was no interest in teaching anything of the new knowledge in the sciences, etc., because those new discoveries called into question the nature of the real world. The Church had staked its prestige on retaining the status quo, in which the Sun went around the Earth, among other things. (No, they didn’t think the Earth was flat, just an immovable sphere in the center of everything.)

As a result, the universities in most of Europe forsook teaching sciences to avoid conflicts with Church dogmas. This reduced them to what James Burke (in The Day the Universe Changed) refers to as “temples of irrelevant logic-chopping”, at a time when unbiased, literate inquiry was badly needed, on purely practical grounds. In the end, most such inquiry came from the universities in Holland, northern Germany, Scandinavia, and England, where for one reason or another Rome’s writ didn’t have quite as much authority. (The reasons ranged from Martin Luther, to Henry VIII, to the Thirty Years’ War.)

As the NAS study shows, the same phenomenon exists in the U.S. university system today. In this case, the faculty are acting once more as “defenders of the faith”, but in this case, the faith is a heady brew of Marxism, anti-Americanism, “deep ecology” neo-Luddism, all-out anti-Westernism, and (perhaps not surprisingly) some old-fashioned anti-Semitism thrown in for good (or bad) measure.

Next, consider that President Obama spent his entire adult life prior to becoming (briefly) a legislator in this hothouse culture of opposition to, not just the United States, but practically every aspect of Western civilization as we know it.

Now explain why anyone should be surprised at his behavior as President of the United States.

clear ether

eon

eon on April 13, 2012 at 12:07 PM

Welch, who helmed GE for 21 years and founded the Jack Welch Management Institute at Strayer University, penned an op-ed article for Reuters with wife Suzy Welch this week in which he tackled the idea of Obama’s enemies list.

Yeah, but did his wife stay-at-home? If so – she is not allowed to have an opinion on economics.

CycloneCDB on April 13, 2012 at 12:07 PM

Comment pages: 1 2