There are things on which I don't have opinions, either because I don't have the information I need (either because it isn't available or because I have not sought it out) or because I don't particularly care (which might be a reason I haven't sought out information).
I'm often unwilling to lay heavy blame for bungling. Was a hospital bombed on purpose, out of gross negligence, or by someone's stupid mistake? Did US military personnel kill Canadian military personnel on purpose, out of drugged-up negligence, or by someone's stupid mistake? Did the ATF ...? Bungling may deserve opprobrium and stepped-up efforts to avert it, but it isn't always symptomatic of something deeply evil. It can occur even where there are the best and most honourable intentions; the intentions will not excuse the bungling or eliminate responsibility, but an act itself is not proof of evil intentions. And when judging people or their systems, intentions really do matter, since people aren't perfect when it comes to actions.
I don't know what the situation was in this case, and haven't felt like doing a doctoral thesis in the matter. I've simply observed what happens to cross my path. That hasn't been anywhere near enough to form a judgment of anyone involved, including Obama.
I've gathered that there is a raging war going on at this site (and I assume elsewhere) between people who are deeply disappointed with and angry at Obama and are vocal in their criticism and people (who may also be even as disappointed, or who may actually agree everything he has done in all respects) who maintain that assailing a Democratic president is not a smart thing to do. I don't know what I would do if I were a voter in the US. I did assess the current president, back during the primaries, as ... well, a year later, I said it here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=190&topic_id=30072&mesg_id=30089Here we are, some time earlier, i.e. before the 2008 election:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=3381031&mesg_id=3381696I said I'd vote for him once he was nominated, if I had to choose, despite my assessment.
And yes, my assessment did include that he pandered and exhibited no firm convictions or clear policies or any reason to believe he had any. I would kinda suspect that may be a contributory factor in the situation under discussion here.
Oh, but what I meant to say ... in this forum, I don't always find that the criticism is coming from the direction I'm standing at.