The Times wonders whether Obama may replace some aides
It has come to the Times’ august and rarefied attention that:
At a time when the Obama administration is lurching from crisis to crisis ”” a looming Cold War in Europe, a brutal Islamic caliphate in the Middle East and a deadly epidemic in West Africa ”” it is not surprising that long-term strategy would take a back seat. But it raises inevitable questions about the ability of the president and his hard-pressed national security team to manage and somehow get ahead of the daily onslaught of events.
Poor beleaguered folk, buffeted by all these crises that they had no part in bringing about.
And love that construction: “it raises inevitable questions.” Passive voice. Does the Times have any such questions, too?
The article’s headline is “Obama Could Replace Aides Bruised by a Cascade of Crises ” Note that word “could.” He could fly a kite on the White House lawn, too, but I doubt he will.
The Times may be trying to hint that he should (replace the aides, that is, not fly a kite). But the author doesn’t seem to think it will happen:
There is little evidence that the president plans a wholesale shake-up…Mr. Obama is also leaning more than ever on his small circle of White House aides, who forged their relationships with him during his 2008 campaign and loom even larger in an administration without weighty voices like those of Robert M. Gates, the former defense secretary, or Hillary Rodham Clinton, the former secretary of state.
When Hillary Clinton is your deeply-missed “weighty voice,” you’re in trouble. Of course, the Times is engaged here in burnishing her resume.
But I’m in agreement that Obama has no intention whatsoever of a shakeup. These are his trusted people, and they do his bidding.
“I’m in agreement that Obama has no intention whatsoever of a shakeup. These are his trusted people, and they do his bidding.”
He probably values their loyalty but I’m not as certain that he isn’t planning a house cleaning. That’s because the Times article might be a signal to Obama that throwing some assistants under the bus would be the best way to handle the up coming scandal, which is being carefully kept under wraps by the MSM until after the election.
“Is the Washington Press Corps Covering Up Another Obama Administration Fiasco? [Updated]”
“More on the Obama Administration Scandal That the Washington Press Corps Tried to Bury”
“Report: ‘Sustained Cyberattack’ Crippled White House for Two Weeks”
I’d love to hear what Michelle says when Obama tells her that Valerie is going under the bus.
Mr. Obama is also leaning more than ever on his small circle of White House aides, who forged their relationships with him during his 2008 campaign…”
And not a single experienced voice of reason amongst them. Kerry? Rice? Jarret? Rhodes? Power? No wonder there have been so many crises.
Jarrett, Powers, Rice and Pfeffer are all horrible but all will stay.
SecDef and SecState only stay because no one else could be confirmed.
They are above the questioning masses. They majestically survey, instead.
If you read the critical introduction to Mein Kampf, Hitler’s prose style (insofar as it was actually his) is characterized as imitative of the comically intellectualist pretensions of the more vulgar German newspapers of the era.
Events occur, it comes to pass, the situation developed, voices were raised, and I guess shit happens.
Ah, the passive voice.
Did I just violate “Godwin’s Law”.
Well if so, so what.
Godwin’s writ don’t run here …
dumping In preparation of the future occupant
balancing on the edge of a razor is a fine art
The chicago machine values loyalty above all else. The inner circle will never go under the bus. But a few of the sophmoric spokes people may well be cast aside, and the msm will coo and twtter over the messiah’s executive machismo.
From Charles C. W. Cooke, National Review, 7/18/11
“In the late 1950s, a journalist asked incumbent British prime minister Harold Macmillan what he considered was most likely to blow his government off course. In an answer that has gone down in history – perhaps as much for its Edwardian construction as its content – Macmillan replied, ‘Events, dear boy, events.’ ”
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/272089/events-dear-boy-events-charlie-cooke
The brains of marxism
Have embraced addiction,
And of our society
No mention liberality.
Kool-aiders, please confess
Your nothingness.
U are to us
Over-ambitious.
Thank you for being dependable.
Buy Wal-mart.
And say a kind hello.
Obama is a cowardly person. He cannot take having different people around. He’s a sissy.
What is find more and more astounding than the Crybaby-in-Chief is…still…the people who voted for him. Twice. They are as scary a bunch of Nazis as there has ever been.
They are the worst Americans there have ever been. Ever. Not even close. The worst, and the worst possible.
After them, because of them, no America.
Mike–I’ve always felt the people that voted for Obama are to blame, hands down. Down through history, “Obamas” have always existed. No excuses for those that voted for him. Ignorant, stupid, prideful, naive, immoral, ignorant, power-hungry; whatever the motivation, the result is harm to our country. They truly bear the blame.
“The Times wonders whether Obama may replace some aides”
Why would he? That is like asking a coach whose team has just won the super bowl with a wider margin than any team in history for the fourth time if he was going to change anything. Obama has been spectacularly successful in accomplishing what he set out to do from day one. Once the election is over the Democrats will all unite to sing about the Messiah once more.
If Lonesome Rhodes was President with a few fans surrounding him and whispering “You’re the greatest President ever”. “They’re just to racist and stupid to appreciate you, Dear Leader”. And the Narciissistic wound opens into a gaping empty hole.
“These are his trusted people, and they do his bidding.”
Or vice versa.
Ah, questions. Questions we should be asking today, this weekend, and Monday. I just wrote a blog post myself about those self-same questions. Come to think of it, that’s the title: Simple Questions We Need to Ask. We’ve been so busy with military, virological, immigration, economic, and security catastrophes (ya gotta admit: this Obama fellow and his team of superior Light-Workers ain’t boring) we have forgotten that the constant lies about Obama Care fed us by the White House and the media weren’t counteracted by people who had the truth. People who are on the ballot on Tuesday.
Ms. Neocon,
I admire the meticulousness with which you research the topics you write about. It pains me to see that aren’t so scrupulous about your writing itself.
Here is a helpful hint: as you type or while you edit, keep an eye out for words, phrases, terms, idioms, etc. whose definitions you aren’t absolutely confident about.
The goat-getter in this case is a double bogey for me as it is a grammar term:
This is not a passive construction. You’ve got a transitive verb and a direct object. It is active.
You’d make it passive thus:
What was once the direct object is now the subject and the verb is an intransitive one. There is no longer a direct object. It is now passive.
Protip: You don’t actually need to care about the verb classification as long as you can recognize a direct object.
Ace made this same mistake some years back, but I expect that sort of sloppiness from him. Part of the charm.
Case study: the first term that came to my mind was “double bogey” but I knew I’d better look the term up to see if it would make an appropriate metaphor. Rather than replace it, I have left it in there to illustrate how the process works.
In conclusion,
Disclaimer: grammar/style errors, real or imagined, have been left unedited as an exercise for the reader.
Incidentally–and I hope I’m not being too forward here–if you wish to thank me for providing such valuable service gratis, you could do worse than send a picture of some sweater puppies with an apple in front to the above email address.
Preferably yours, but I’m not likely to know the difference either way.
If that’s too much effort, you may, at your option, substitute an apple-themed sweater.
Very respectfully yours,
G.T.S.R.
Grammar Troll:
Actually, I’m very careful—you should see the grammar mistakes I do look up and correct. They are legion.
And actually (although you may not believe this) I suspected that “passive voice” might not be quite right. I wasn’t sure. But I was in enough of a hurry that I didn’t bother to look it up. One thing about blogging—you’re usually in a race for time.
What I meant to refer to, of course, was (and again, I don’t have time to find the proper term, but perhaps you could help me out 🙂 ), the lack of a human agent.
@ SHaron “Mike—I’ve always felt the people that voted for Obama are to blame, hands down. Down through history, “Obamas” have always existed. No excuses for those that voted for him. Ignorant, stupid, prideful, naive, immoral, ignorant, power-hungry; whatever the motivation, the result is harm to our country. They truly bear the blame.”
You are correct. It is simply outrageous and on the verge of bigoted not to blame the people who are actually responsible for this dangerous and sick man who is our President – the tragic malicious loons who voted for him. Twice it must always be added. Twice.
That is NO ONE ELSE’s fault. That is no one else’s responsibility. No one held a gun to anyone’s head and made them do it. They did it. They knew it and they did it.
Why? Why do people tempt fate? Why do people look at car wrecks and football injuries. Why do some people commit suicide? Some people do. And they are all responsible for their own actions. Anyone who says otherwise is also pretending – that they are children and not adults.
We will never recover until and unless we admit the horrible truth – the worst people that ever lived in America, ever, are 60 m of our friends and neighbors who voted for a neo-Hitler to abuse and enslave the rest of us. They wanted to do it and they did it.
They think it will profit them. They think they’ll get more “stuff”.
That is the bet they made.
Karma will decide the case I am sure.