[steevyjeors]

[Q=Elok;5721368]The funny thing is, he's doing a lot of things the way he said he would; he tried, at least initially, to build a strong bipartisan consensus.[/q] Ah, the naivete of youth... just don't drink the cool-aide.

He's made absolutely no effort for "bipartisan" anything. He's made speeches saying he's "open to suggestions" but they're lies. He listens to suggestions that agree with what he and his fellow leftist radicals already plan to do. Any time people oppose him they're racists, bigots, and torturing warmongers.

He's shown himself fairly open to diplomacy while escalating the war in Afghanistan. He's taken time to think things over carefully before coming to a decision. He'd been in the Senate making votes and speeches about these issues for 4 years. He consulted with his own generals to the same extent that he consulted with Republicans on the auto bail-outs and health care. He said he "doesn't feel comfortable" with the idea of winning the war in Afghanistan.

I'm not saying those are all good (or bad) things, but he said he'd work that way, and so he is. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Obama is mainly guilty of not closing Gitmo as fast as he said he would--and Congress has some of the responsibility for that delay--and not stopping "rendition" of terror suspects. You are wrong. Gitmo is what the left is upset about; that's "I told you so" material for the conservatives. He also said he'd be the paragon of openness, and wouldn't sign a bill until it had been available for public review on the White House website for five days. I don't think he's done that once.

Anyway, now a sizable proportion of us feel they'd rather have our old "decisive" monkey-boy back, which just shows that we as a nation deserved to be afflicted with that bumbling ass. Yes, we deserve a President who doesn't intend to turn this country into an Orwellian nightmare.