Michael Wolff, writing in USA Today, says that Obama’s strange comments about the Obamacare technology debacle are symptomatic of a broader problem: CEO’s being “clueless” about technology.
Uh, no. The problems with the Obamacare systems do not particularly reflect Obama’s cluelessness about technology, they reflect his complete lack of competence and experience in the field of executive management. Basic executive functions such as organizing work carefully and appropriately, putting the right people in charge, checking up to see how things are going, and making adjustments as necessary rather than just “hoping that something will turn up” are not specific to software and telecommunication systems. I have no doubt that Obama’s approach to management would be equally disastrous if he were running a railroad or a factory or a retail store…even a railroad or a factory or a retail store in pre-computer days.
The very strong support for Obama among people who write and talk and create images for a living reflected, in many if not most cases, an arrogant belief that their own skill sets were applicable to just about any important task, and a failure to understand that in order to run things effectively, a person has to have some experience in running things, and, even more important, an interest in the process of running things. An individual who has been “bored to death his whole life,” as Obama’s close friend Valerie Jarrett said of him, is most unlikely to either possess such an interest or to develop it.
6 thoughts on “The Cluelessness Was Not Just About “Tech””
It works fine.
It’s destroying private insurance. That the rest of it is not destroyed already is due to it being presented piecemeal. An enemy that presents his force piecemeal is a godsend to his foe.
The Tech faux paus is either a brilliant masterstroke or blind luck.
Look at what the Law is doing, not what the web site doesn’t.
Uh, no. The problems with the Obamacare systems do not particularly reflect Obama’s cluelessness about technology, they reflect his complete lack of competence and experience in the field of executive management.
Which was obvious to anyone who had read his resume.
Regarding the competence of an Obama-led administration, I recall the rubric I composed before the 2008 election. For those who had been US Senators and had been elected President, I composed the following rubric:
1) Armed Forces experience
2) Governor experience
3) House of Representatives experience
4) Cabinet secretary experience
5) Vice President experience.
Of those with US Senator experience who became President, only President Harding had NONE OF THE ABOVE experience. NONE OF THE ABOVE experience also describes President Obama. And President Harding at least had some executive experience- he ran a newspaper for a dozen years.
You get what you pay for, not what you hope you are getting.
Benefits Avatar…true that Obama viewed Obamacare merely as a way station on the way to total government control of healthcare. But the manifest failures of the technical systems, combined with the increasingly manifest design problems with the law, have not helped his cause, and they have had a strongly negative impact on the adulation upon which his ego greedily feeds.
People who are effective in their jobs must devote their efforts to doing *what the job requires*, rather than just what they feel most comfortable doing…and Obama is too emotionally lazy, too intellectually lazy, too just plain ordinary lazy, to have stretched himself even for the success of his signature program.
The worst ruling class ever:
“We Thought That [Obama] Was Going to Be the Next Messiah” by Peter Wehner
Garry Wills: Obama’s 2008 speech, throwing Jeremiah Wright and his Grandmother under the bus: as good as Abraham Lincoln’s 1860 Cooper Union speech.
Tom Hayden, Barbara Ehrenrich, Bill Fletcher, Jr. and Danny Glover: “as great a speech as ever given by a presidential candidate, revealing a philosophical depth, personal authenticity, and political intelligence … he carries unmatched leadership potentials … .”
November 7, 2008 … Alan Brinkley: “Obama has that quality that Lincoln had.”
David Remnick of the New Yorker also compared Obama’s rhetorical skills to Lincoln. …
in 2009 presidential historian Michael Beschloss: “He’s probably the smartest guy ever to become President.”
The Law Stands, except as modified at whim by our Majestic State. Apparently you conflate The Cause with public opinion.
The Law destroys private insurance, the pace of destruction is contingent on private insurance’s exposure.
Private Insurance and the policy holders are quite happy to sue for peace on terms of being eaten later and not now.
This means that the Executive that is bent on destroying private insurance can have an easier time of it by destroying it piecemeal. Generals in war pray for such foes, the ACA victims and opponents are happy to provide it for a moments respite. The discretion of when to destroy them remains a matter of Executive discretion under the almighty aegis of Sacred Law. You will notice the Tea Party was strangely the first group to have their insurance destroyed, they have been granted a respite as their pressing was getting rather hot, and the Tea Party insured call this Victory.
When it is not even coverage, for the Insurance Companies actuaries and Lawyers correctly inform them they cannot proceed on any kind of sane footing to cover, as it may be yanked from them at the next Executive whim, and they will quite be BREAKING THE LAW if they cover said Piecemeal Party.
You see Mrs. Gadsen your snake is all rattle and no fangs.
When PCs were first coming out in force and saturating the office my father, business owner – took it as a matter of pride that he didn’t know how to use them.
That was for his employees to know.
Comments are closed.