You are hereBlogs / BillyClub's blog / Activist Donna Smith: “Obama Is a Disappointment!”

Activist Donna Smith: “Obama Is a Disappointment!”


By BillyClub - Posted on 07 February 2011

On Monday, Feb. 7, 2011, Social Justice activist Donna Smith criticized President Barack Obama for meeting today with the Chamber of Commerce. She said Obama has been “a disappointment” with respect to responding to the growing needs of working class people in this country. Ms. Smith was featured in Michael Moore’s movie “Sicko.” She is associated with the National Nurses United/California Nurses Association. Her comments came at a sidewalk union-sponsored rally just north of Lafayette Park, in Washington, D.C. To learn more go to: DonnaSmith.

Tags

That's disappointing for statement, for it's grotesquely PC. It's a slap in the face of any and all truly caring, intelligent, aware, and so on, people, who know far better than to believe that Obama is only a disappointment, which is a typical American watering down or whitewash. But I'll keep my additional descriptive words about him out of this post. This Web site might not support the complete language that I can use to describe what I think of him and his asinine 2008 cheerleaders; not refering to people who voted for him while doubting him, only refering to his real and blind cheerleaders, who are treachorous in character. People who supported him while at least having some doubts, as David Swanson has said that he did, were not among his, Obama's cheerleaders, or certainly not the ones I'm talking about. He didn't viciously and blindly attack Ralph Nader and his supporters, but Obama's real cheerleaders did, and I have extremely little to no sympathy for these so-called Americans.

Disappointment? My butt! DISGRACE, traitor, liar, charlatan, and so on; but I'm not disappointed. Obama hasn't proven to be any better than I and many others said he would dangerously be. It's unwelcome vindication, never sought, always warned against; but his ilk fans didn't want to [listen].

Old adage: "We reap what we sow"!

It's long past due time to lift the CROSS off of humanity. Is it disappointing to be crucified? It might be if you're a rich kid from a rich family, but if you're an average joe or jane, then what's the surprise? Heh, we've only been meat for slaughter since ancient times for the elites.

UPDATE:

The above words are based on the title unfortunately used for the embedded video in this page. Now that I've listened to the video, Donna Smith's words are fine, good, welcome, and the interviewer should have kept his junior level mouth shut. He's the idiot who added the word "disappointment" about Obama, rather than Donna Smith having done this on her own.

She's protesting with respect to health care and is definitely right, but the interviewer put the word "disappointment" into her mouth and she accepted it, because it's fitting in this case, but why do interviewers have to put words into other people's mouths as if just trying to create more media propaganda, playing political warfare, instead of focusing on ISSUES?

Her words were fine without the interviewer inserting his opinionated "disappointment". She had expressed herself well enough and seems a little hesitant about accepting the interviewer trying to introduce "disappointment" about Obama into her mouth; perhaps wanting to avoid playing part of propaganda against Obama. He was like "baiting" her and she seemed to understandably have a momentary pause about this.

Her purpose isn't to war against Obama or Washington; it's to fight for fair health care. The interviewer illustrated his own intentions though and they evidently consist of about war on Obama and Washington. He's an interviewer, journalist, journalist-wannabe, whatever, but she's a health care professional and that's what's important to her. That's what he should have stayed focused on; instead of his own little warfaring with Washington.

If the interviewer thinks that Obama is a disappointment, then that is his opinion and he has a right to it, but he should state it as such; even if it is a serious watering down of reality. He should not try to feed it into other people's mouths though.

Interviews should never be about trying to get others to say what the interviewer desires; it should be a free Q&A, where the interviewer, (preferably) an intelligent and competetent one, asks a Q. in a critically objective manner and then receives the reply from the person(s) interviewed. If the answers merit further questioning or rebuttal, then provide that, but only in a critically objective manner; NOT matter of mere opinion.

His opinion about Obama being a disappointment is pitiful. It's a commencement, but only a baby step in the possibly right direction. The interviewer is underdeveloped or inexperienced. He does not know how to LISTEN! Listening is a very important, key, crucial skill, and it's one I was commended for. I KNOW HOW TO LISTEN. It doesn't mean that we agree, but misunderstanding seldomly happens, say.

People who lack the listening ability will not make good media workers or public representatives. Even retail stores sales clerks making minimum wage need public relations skills; curteosy, and that means LISTENING, [hearing] what the others say and knowing what they mean, as well as being able to ask questions when not being sure of what the others mean. The latter is not what the guy interviewing Donna Smith did. He clearly wanted to get her to agree to his view that Obama is, in his view, a disappointment.

Jackass interviewer! Not bad, but still not really competent.

Listen to Paul Jay on The Real News Network, TheRealNews.com, TheRealNews at Youtube. He interjects, he asks a lot of questions, but it's always done in a critically objective manner, and it's rare that it is not intelligent. It's always intelligent and honest, from what I've gathered from many TRNN interviews with him as host anyway. He might occasionally bring up a question that seems, to us, pointless, but it's always done in a critically objective manner.

The guy who interviewed Donna Smith had absolutely no justification in bother with the stupid question of whether she thinks Obama is a disappointment, and by doing that, he risked putting her activism for necessary health care rights at risk.

In any case, besides for the junior level interviewer in this video, Donna Smith's words are very good. She evidently is a serious professional; perhaps more cautious than some others are, but she has a lot of mind. It's understandable that important professionals who are activists will be careful about the way they speak.

Find someone else far more competent for acting as an interviewer on activist issues! That interviewer should be a camera or backroom guy, not interviewer.

Obama hasn't disappointed me at all. I fully expected him to do nothing! He was simply the lesser of two evils. That is all the American people will vote for. I voted for Ralph Nader and I don't regret it even slightly!

AL K.

He didn't do anything good, but that doesn't mean that he didn't do anything bad, ill, evil. He's done a lot of that sh*t, so he hasn't been idle.

Informed Activist

Support WarIsACrime



Donate.








Tweet your Congress critters here.


Advertise on this site!




Facebook      Twitter





Our Stores:























Movie Memorabilia.



The log-in box below is only for bloggers. Nobody else will be able to log in because we have not figured out how to stop voluminous spam ruining the site. If you would like us to have the resources to figure that out please donate. If you would like to receive occasional emails please sign up. If you would like to be a blogger here please send your resume.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.