SpursReport.com

SpursReport.com (http://www.spursreport.com/forums/)
-   Hardball Politics (http://www.spursreport.com/forums/hardball-politics/)
-   -   One Year Later: Ten Things President Obama HAS Done Since He’s Been in Office (http://www.spursreport.com/forums/hardball-politics/78321-one-year-later-ten-things-president-obama-has-done-since-he-s-been-office.html)

Dulce 11-16-09 11:02 PM

One Year Later: Ten Things President Obama HAS Done Since He’s Been in Office
 
One Year Later: Ten Things President Obama HAS Done Since He’s Been in Office
by Anthony Asadullah Samad posted on Wednesday, 11 November


http://www.laprogressive.com/wp-cont...bama-Nobel.gif

Obama Nobel One Year Later: Ten Things President Obama HAS Done Since Hes Been in Office One year ago, the United States witnessed the people take its government back from ideological tyranny, greed, and anti-intellectualism. The election of President Barack Obama was a worldwide event — a signal to the world that America, at last, had overcome it’s last taboo (at least publicly), race. Graveyards all over America with generations of three centuries of racialized pasts either roared, “Finally,” or rolled over in amazement that this could happen here of all places.

One year later, the nation is a lot more sober with the reality of what change really is, and what was necessary to bring change about. The most amazing thing about the past year is the short memories everybody seems to have about how bad things really were. People seem to have forgotten that the economy was in a freefall, two misguided wars were draining the U.S. treasury ,and we had little goodwill to be found anywhere around the globe.

All guns were pointed at us with no calvary in sight. Everybody thought Barack Obama was the better candidate. Everybody agreed that Barack Obama should be elected President. But NOBODY was going to call it, bet the farm on it, or even say it, above a whisper, that Barack Obama would be the next President — until they saw it with their own eyes. The reality of the Americ’s situation, however, is that no matter who was elected President, the country was in trouble. And that’s exactly how it’s gone down.

The ignorant (who are not really ignorant, just still mad), the foolish, and the partisans all want to suggest that President Obama hasn’t done anything in the 10 months since he’s been President. They even want to blame the outcomes of this month’s elections in Virginia and New Jersey as a referendum on the job Obama is doing. Like things were just going to turn around because Barack showed up. It’s simple-minded and disingenuous to suggest nothing has been done. So, let’s look at (at least) ten things President Obama has managed to achieve within his first year (that’s not over yet):

* Ten: President Obama has slowed down the recession. Nobody is talking depression anymore, and some are talking recovery. Trying to catch this economy from crashing was like trying to catch a 100 ton boulder dropped off a 70-story building. The nertia alone is going to push you backwards until you can slow the force. Most wouldn’t even step in front of a boulder coming at them like this. Obama stepped in the gap and stuck to a measured recovery plan of stimulus dollars and labor force transition.

* Nine: President Obama saved Wall Street. And Wall Street tried to punk him by paying itself first. He exposed the absence of regulatory oversight on Wall Street, and economic and financial investment reform is being discussed like never before.

* Eight: President Obama saved the collapse of the American automotive industry. By making GM restructure before bailing them out, and putting incentive money to help the industry, he saved the industry. People want to make jokes about “cash for clunkers” but the automakers aren’t laughing. They’re thanking him.

* Seven: President Obama shifted the focus of the war from Iraq to Aftghanistan, and putting the emphasis on reducing terrorism where it should have been all along-but now they want to say he’s making war, not peace. Well, at least he didn’t destabilize a whole region on a false premise. It’s better than what we had.

* Six: President Obama relaxed Anti-American tensions throughout the world. This was more serious than the previous administration was willing to let on. The President made good on his promise to make a major address on American-Muslim relations and he did it in a Muslim country, showing a good faith that America hadn’t shown in a while.

* Five: President Obama closed the prisoner “torture camp” at Guantanamo Bay. Holding prisoners for eight years without charging them was acceptable under the previous administration. It is not acceptable under this administration. Obama’s next challenge is what to do with the detainees.

* Four: President Obama has made the environment a national priority, and a primary source for job creation. The era of polluting industrialists is over, and with a President that understands the benefits of green conversion, America can become a leader in the industry of the future.

* Three: President Obama has made education a national priority by putting emphasis and money behind new ideas like charter schools, but speaking directly to school children in telling them they have to do their part. It’s what any President should be encouraging but Obama’s so popular, he was accused of trying to “socialize” or “prothelitize” the children. It’s a sad day when the President of the United States can’t speak to school children because their parent’s views conflict.

* Two: President Obama is on the verge of passing universal health care, with a public option, to insure everybody in America has care when they are sick. He’s doing it, despite villification of ideologues and while in the midst of an H1N1 epidemic where millions could get sick this winter. The people feel him on this.

* One: President Obama has restored credibility to the American Presidency where the world is looking to him to lead America out of unilateralism and back into multilateral global cooperation. The Nobel Peace Prize was an acknowledgment that Obama had led and is leading a non-violent cultural revolution in America. Everybody, except for a few in America, can see the change. Still, the world understands what happened one year ago, and they thought they’d never see such a shift occur. The election of Obama helped the world see the light that America wasn’t ready to self-destruct.

One Year Later: Ten Things President Obama HAS Done Since Hes Been in Office Not bad, for less than a year in office. People need to stop complaining that he hasn’t done enough. Obama was elected President. He wasn’t elected Jesus. Like Al Sharpton said on Meet The Press, “we now realize that Obama doesn’t walk on water, but he’s still the fastest swimmer in America.”

One Year Later: Ten Things President Obama HAS Done Since He's Been in Office | The LA Progressive

jessi 11-17-09 10:00 AM

lol.. "and this is why he is the greatest president ever!":laugh

TheLadiesMike 11-17-09 01:56 PM

:roll

TheLadiesMike 11-17-09 02:07 PM

10. The economy is a mess and his "have my cake and eat it to" policy is typical politics. Either he owns the economy or Bush does. Instead he takes credit and passes the blame. What a joke.

9. Another have your cake and eat it too claim.

8. Sounds like a Mission Accomplished banner moment. Until the industry changes, it will be a mess. All Obama did was illegally payback union supporters.

7. Shifted the focus to Afghanistan and is in the 10th month of deciding whether to win or surrender. Way to go.

6. Yeah, Muslims have been showing the love at Ft. Hood. They don't hate us anymore, we clicked our heels in Cairo.

5. Seriously? It's still open.

4. Cap and trade is about government control and has nothing to do with the environment. Another "green job" myth, too.

3. He's so popular! :laugh I love how charter schools are a "new idea" yet some of us have been advocating to create them for years. One of Obama's first decisions was to end school choice in DC and send poor black kids back to failing public schools while he sent his kids to nice private schools. Once again, he chose campaign contributing unions over the people.

2. Obama is on the verge of spending trillions that will do little to extend coverage while doing nothing to reduce costs. This will be an absolut disaster.

1. Wherever he's trying to lead nobody's following.

WhiteChocolateJr 11-17-09 10:04 PM

Even More...


There is a rising chorus of impatient progressive bloggers, some on these pages, calling Obama a failure and a do-nothing president only nine months into his first of four years as president. SNL's "" on Obama may well have empowered some on our side to start playing on the fringes of the Limbaugh sandbox. While the charges and name-calling are not as vicious as the Limbaugh Lemmings, it has started nonetheless.

So what has our newly-minted ******* president been doing for nine months?

Let's start with what he has not done. He has not found a cure for cancer, reversed climate change, ended poverty, brought peace to the Middle East, ended all wars, created enough new jobs, or created a single-payer healthcare system. These are big ticket items that no president will ever accomplish, so it is a little disingenuous to suggest a standard for Obama that does not apply to all past presidents or to future presidents. As Princeton economics professor Alan Blinder says in assessing what Obama has accomplished so far, "If he seems to have achieved little, it's partly because he set out to do too much." To which I would add, and we created an unrealistic agenda for what we wanted him to accomplish.

Let's continue with what he has done. First and foremost, none other than the Wall Street Journal, in an assessment titled, "Democrats Quiet Changes Pile Up", says he has accomplished more in nine months than George Bush did in his first nine months.

Let's be specific:

1. Significantly, he buried the Imperial Presidency of George Bush and restored the Constitutional balance of government by respecting the equal standing of the legislative branch of government. As a former constitutional law professor, this is a major matter of change of tone and style that he promised during the campaign, and he has delivered. (Not pretty or necessarily effective given the Reid-less leadership in the Senate, but we are a constitutional democracy.)

2. Passed and signed the stimulus package, the biggest piece of legislation--ever--in blinding speed, thus being able to start to stabilize the economy, with GDP now projected to grow at the rate of 3 percent by the end of the year. Check the comeback of your 401K since Obama has taken over.

3. Stabilized the top 20 banks without federalizing them.

4. Reduced the rate of foreclosures inherited from the Bush administration.

5. Signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act that makes it easier to sue for wage discrimination, a dramatic reversal of the bill's fortunes under Bush.

6. Granted regulatory power to the FDA to control tobacco products, another dramatic reversal of the Bush years that industry has lobbied hard to prevent.

7. Signed the Matthew Shepard Hate Act that expanded federal hate crime protection to categories of sexual orientation and gender, to the major consternation of the Religious Right.

8. Killed the F-22 fighter jet program, a popular program with Congress, saving billions of dollars.

9. With a stroke of a pen, as a bill signing, enacted the largest conservation measure in 15 years, spanning the Bush and Clinton records.

10. Implement an electronic medical record system before any healthcare legislation was introduced. This new technology will be singularly responsible for saving lives and reducing the high administrative costs of healthcare, a key element of reform.

11. Extended a $2500 tax credit to 5 million families to help with college tuition.

12. Cooperated with Japan in bringing a $5 billion stabilization package for Pakistan.

13. Engaged the Muslim world in a dialogue, beginning with his unprecedented speech in Cairo, followed by an interview with Al Arabiya, and face-to-face discussions with Iran, a total reversal of the Bush years of Muslim baiting and hate.

14. Dramatically reversed the reputation of the United States around the world, with now most nations looking favorably on the US, and receiving the Nobel Peace Prize as one consequence.

15. Agreed to plan for bringing the troops home from Iraq, at a slower pace than what he promised, but based on knowledge that commanders-in-chief, not candidates, have.

16. Brought the White House online, doing for the White House what he had done for political campaigning. There are now online Q&A's with the administration, and a White House blog.

17. Released the names of all visitors to the White House, a total reversal of the secret Bush years.

18. Told Mexico that the US is responsible for some of their drug problems, a no small, but truthful admission.

19. Restored the rights of states to regulate the medical use of marijuana without fear of federal law enforcement intrusion.

20. Banned the use of torture, and he has begun a complete review of the torture policies under Bush.

21. Appointed the first Latina to the Supremes: Imagine what would have happened to the Supreme Court under four more years of radical Republicans. Obama has thus averted a long-term dramatic swing to the extreme right on the court, and appointed a progressive to keep matters in check.

In summary, and to those on these pages and elsewhere who see things differently, I say this feels a little like Waiting for Godot. Let's recall one thing that Samuel Beckett said in the mischievous play:
"The tears of the world are a constant quantity. For each one who begins to weep somewhere else another stops. The same is true of the laugh. Let us not then speak ill of our generation, it is not any unhappier than its predecessors. Let us not speak well of it either. Let us not speak of it at all. It is true the population has increased."
Link

Dulce 11-17-09 11:35 PM

WhiteChocolate,Jr.

Please do not bring facts into this forum, let alone this thread.

Thank you.

---SR.com Management





:sarcasm

Nazr For 3 11-20-09 01:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheLadiesMike (Post 1171903)
10. The economy is a mess and his "have my cake and eat it to" policy is typical politics. Either he owns the economy or Bush does. Instead he takes credit and passes the blame. What a joke.

If it is his mess, he has certainly claimed responsibility by assuming a leadership role in fixing it. And if you look at the trend since his election and inauguration, he has been doing a much better job than Bush did.

Quote:

9. Another have your cake and eat it too claim.
See #10.

Quote:

8. Sounds like a Mission Accomplished banner moment. Until the industry changes, it will be a mess. All Obama did was illegally payback union supporters.
What do you mean illegally? And what is wrong with supporting a union? Why is this a mission accomplished moment? Unlike Bush, who declared a victory, Obama saved the auto industry. As in, the saving already happened. Had Obama not intervened, the auto industry would have folded. Does that mean the auto industry will never fold? No.

Contrast that from declaring victory in Iraq (even though the only discernible objective was to find and destroy WMDs, which were neither found nor destroyed), which had not (and as a matter of fact, never) happened. And Obama did not fly to Detroit for a photo-op, either.

Quote:

7. Shifted the focus to Afghanistan and is in the 10th month of deciding whether to win or surrender. Way to go.
Let's review. He inherited TWO wars. One of which (Iraq) made no sense in light of the events. The other (Afghanistan) makes sense in light of the events (the Taliban is friendly to Al-Qaeda, who planned and carried out the attacks of 9/11/01). Obama did not cause the Taliban to restructure and regain power. So it appears you, (and, by extension, conservative critics) are the one who is trying to have his cake and eat it, too. One one hand, if Obama pulls out, that would be irresponsible in light of his responsibilities as Commander-In-Chief and the facts on the ground as reported by the officers who are there, who report to the same Secretary of Defense that they did under Bush. And this irresponsibility would certainly br criticized to no end by the conservatives. On the other hand, if Obama carries out these responsibilities in light of the facts on the ground, that does push back the date upon which the troops should be pulled out. And this pushing back of that date would also be criticized to no end by the conservatives. Because changing one's mind makes one a "flip flopper," regardless of whether the change is logical in light of changed facts.

Quote:

6. Yeah, Muslims have been showing the love at Ft. Hood. They don't hate us anymore, we clicked our heels in Cairo.
You look at the tragedy at Ft. Hood and think of terrorism. Was that also your reaction to the events in Littleton in 1999? Or was that different because the gunmen were white males? Maj. Hasan is a US citizen. What he did may or may not have been any more "Anti-American" as what Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold did in 1999, or what Cho Seung-Hui did 2007. We know he was a very disturbed man. We also know that he'd been treated like sh*t by other soldiers. I'm not saying that excuses his horrendous actions. But that does make this much less of an internationalized act. If this had been a white, black, or Latino guy who'd gone postal on his workplace, do you think conservatives like yourself would internationalize the tragedy? I highly doubt it. Just because Maj. Hasan is a Muslim doesn't mean that what he did was sanctioned by or in any way reflects what the Muslim World abroad thinks of the U.S.

So let's not turn this tragedy into more than what it was.

If you give any credence at all to facts, then you must acknowledge that the world is MUCH happier with Obama behind the wheel than it ever was with Bush.


Quote:

5. Seriously? It's still open.
Yes, but Obama has plans to close it. Before closing it, he has to figure out what to do with the detainees, which requires a lot of logistical and legal work. Compare that to what Bush did (opened it, kept it open, let unspeakable violations of international law happen there, with no plans to close it).

Quote:

4. Cap and trade is about government control and has nothing to do with the environment. Another "green job" myth, too.
Cap and trade has everything to do with the environment. Are you serious? It's a program that creates incentives (where before there were none) for polluters to find ways to pollute less and for the polluters who pollute less to profit (by selling credits) off of polluters who pollute more (who must buy credits). By creating an incentive to pollute less, cap and trade impacts the environment in a positive way.

"Green Jobs" are not a myth, either. Just go to Stillwater and ask T. Boone.

Quote:

3. He's so popular! :laugh I love how charter schools are a "new idea" yet some of us have been advocating to create them for years. One of Obama's first decisions was to end school choice in DC and send poor black kids back to failing public schools while he sent his kids to nice private schools. Once again, he chose campaign contributing unions over the people.
If the idea wasn't new, then when were they ever shown the kind of support that Obama has shown? What president has ever shown the kind of interest in education that Obama has shown? What president, for that matter, has ever done more than complain about teachers? Obama actually calls out the crappy parents who let their kids become crappy students who turn their schools into crappy schools. That's what I call honestly and it's refreshing.

"School Choice," btw, is stupid. Its a euphemism for a voucher system, which doesn't solve the problem at all. Taxpayers still have to pay for the "failing schools." And who decides who gets a voucher and who doesn't? And if everyone gets a voucher, does that mean that all the "good schools" have to take in all the students from "failing schools?" If so, doesn't that reduce the student/teacher ratio AND put a bunch of teachers and administrators from "failing schools" on unemployment? Who do you think will hire these teachers? Probably the same schools that are now bursting at the seams with the voucher students.

So then you end up with the teachers from the "failing schools" teaching the students from the "failing schools" but they're doing it in buildings that were once "good schools." It's nothing more than a shell game and it makes no sense. Solve the real problem.

Quote:

2. Obama is on the verge of spending trillions that will do little to extend coverage while doing nothing to reduce costs. This will be an absolut disaster.
Trillions? Really? Your numbers are laughably inaccurate, as is your claim that it will "do little" (and if it does end up "doing little," whose fault do you think that will be? Let's not forget that he can only sign what Congress puts on his desk, and if it "does little," is that the bill that he has fought for? You can't have it both ways.)
[/quote]


Quote:

1. Wherever he's trying to lead nobody's following.
Nobody's following. Except, of course, for the record turnout of voters and the millions who have stayed connected after the campaign to fight for universal healthcare. And that Nobel committee. :rolleyes

spurlover9 11-20-09 06:17 PM

No matter what political view you have, we can all agree on something: Obama is certainly taking more action (negative or positive; however your views are) than Bush.

admiralsnackbar 11-21-09 03:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spurlover9 (Post 1172438)
No matter what political view you have, we can all agree on something: Obama is certainly taking more action (negative or positive; however your views are) than Bush.

Agreed.

We can also say that TLM never bothers to defend his original points. In the 8 years I've been here, he seems to always do a talking-points drive-by, then disappears when people address his points. Because there are better things to do in Oklahoma, no doubt.

obijon80 11-22-09 12:54 AM

90% of the threads in this forum are started by leftists spitting out someone else's opinion and research instead of their own. I don't blame him at all for posting a short retort and getting the hell out of Dodge. If there's no effort on the part of the poster to formulate anything of their own in order to initiate a discussion, then why should anyone have to provide a full thesis in response to say that they disagree?

Dulce 11-22-09 01:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by obijon80 (Post 1172673)
90% of the threads in this forum are started by leftists spitting out someone else's opinion and research instead of their own. I don't blame him at all for posting a short retort and getting the hell out of Dodge. If there's no effort on the part of the poster to formulate anything of their own in order to initiate a discussion, then why should anyone have to provide a full thesis in response to say that they disagree?

Are you talking about me?

Jason R 11-22-09 01:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by obijon80 (Post 1172673)
90% of the threads in this forum are started by leftists spitting out someone else's opinion and research instead of their own. I don't blame him at all for posting a short retort and getting the hell out of Dodge. If there's no effort on the part of the poster to formulate anything of their own in order to initiate a discussion, then why should anyone have to provide a full thesis in response to say that they disagree?

And 90% of the right wingers spit out a load of Tea Party Express bullcrap. But hey, that's just the way it is.

Money4Nothing 11-24-09 10:05 AM

All of those people who say that President Obama has "dramatically" changed the opinion of the US around the world have No Idea what they are talking about. I would be suprised if any of them have ever even been to another country recently.

Most people around the world like Obama as our president, and as a person, but few have changed their attitude about the US as a country. This is reflected in several European and Asian polls.

Anecdotally, I have spent the last couple months in the Middle East, talking with British, Australian, Pakistani, Indian, and Saudi nationals. Dozens of people, and without exception they all express the exact sentiment that I just mentioned. They like Obama, but have no reason whatsoever yet to change their opinion of America as a nation. Its not our politics they object to, but our culture.

Don't listen to pundits who are spinning agendas. Talk to people for yourself.

$

WhiteChocolateJr 11-24-09 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Money4Nothing (Post 1172957)
All of those people who say that President Obama has "dramatically" changed the opinion of the US around the world have No Idea what they are talking about. I would be suprised if any of them have ever even been to another country recently.

Most people around the world like Obama as our president, and as a person, but few have changed their attitude about the US as a country. This is reflected in several European and Asian polls.

Anecdotally, I have spent the last couple months in the Middle East, talking with British, Australian, Pakistani, Indian, and Saudi nationals. Dozens of people, and without exception they all express the exact sentiment that I just mentioned. They like Obama, but have no reason whatsoever yet to change their opinion of America as a nation. Its not our politics they object to, but our culture.

Don't listen to pundits who are spinning agendas. Talk to people for yourself.

$

Money: I say that Obama has affected a great deal of world sentiment vis-a-vis the US image abroad. Dramatically affected changes, even.

My source? I spent five months in Costa Rica, Panama, Nicaragua, Honduras this past summer (working with the UNHCR out of San Jose), and about the same amount of time last year in Europe. The year before, I lived in Spain for a while, and while there made several trips to Morocco. I've spent considerable time in Eastern Europe including Bulgaria and Albania. I've spent about half my last four years or so overseas. I've seen firsthand at local and professional levels abroad how the US was viewed, generally, during the Bush years; I've seen the change since 2009. Don't just discount every statement of "change" as punditry--the President's calm demeanor and intellectual deliberation doesn't play well in US 10-second soundbites, but that thoughtfulness and level of consideration is huge overseas. Maybe the feeling on the street is different in the middle east, but it's not fair to say that the sentiment if Riyadh is in any way global.

As much as President Obama was getting fricasseed domestically for his involvement in the Honduran coup-that-kinda-was, his approach to a situation that necessarily required a calm and reasoned approach probably preserved the recent quasi-peace of Honduras rather than tipping the balance toward the same military action of old. Can you imagine how cowboy diplomacy would have played out in the situation? I can; I was there on the streets in San Pedro Sula when the protesters for "Mel" claimed the bridge by the airport. I was in the corner Soda having a Barena with some locals, listening to them talk about the situation. There is no doubt about it: US ultimatum or threats of US intervention or reprisal would have escalated the already high local tension to levels that negotiation and time could not have lowered. The President's calm but unwavering insistence on the process for peace is what led to the first talks in San Jose, and stayed the hand of the protesters looking for a reason to light that fuse.

That is one example, but it's a marked departure from the old administration--and it's the very kind of difference that leads to the "dramatic" changes that you are so quick to dismiss as mere talking points.

admiralsnackbar 11-25-09 12:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by obijon80 (Post 1172673)
90% of the threads in this forum are started by leftists spitting out someone else's opinion and research instead of their own. I don't blame him at all for posting a short retort and getting the hell out of Dodge. If there's no effort on the part of the poster to formulate anything of their own in order to initiate a discussion, then why should anyone have to provide a full thesis in response to say that they disagree?

If you're responding to my calling out TLM, be aware I'm doing it as a response to his being lackadaisical with respect to defending ANY kind of comment he posts, not just "left-wing-generated" (pardon paraphrasing) from the past 4 years.

My beef goes back at least 8 yrs, during which time the left-wingers didn't even have the huevos to post here and this board was all FOX news BS from Dizz and TBNL. If you don't remember when this board was mostly right-wing, you were spending too much time where you ought to've: in the Spurs section.

I don't doubt TLM has great points to make, but in ALL these nearly 10 years posting here, I have YET to see the guy defend himself.

If that makes me an a-hole, so be it, but having spent more than a few hours here and there responding to people, it irritates me that the guy thinks he can breeze in and post something without corroboration as if it effin' matters.

admiralsnackbar 11-25-09 01:05 AM

And $, you're right: every country in the world still considers us with trepidation and -- on some level -- contempt. Our country has allowed despots to exist and has failed to cesnsure past despots. This certainly engenders cynicism on a global level, I agree. All that said, people are less convinced the USA is becoming a bona-fide fascist country.

It may be a small PR victory, but at least in Latin America -- where I work -- it is something better than we had under Bush, under whose administration people didn't know what they could expect.

People here are no less afraid of what the US can become, but they aren't afraid of something the US actually IS.

TheLadiesMike 11-25-09 01:51 AM

Dude, I have been a member of this board since I found it right after the 2003 championship so I don't know how I've been disappointing you for a decade. I don't waste a lot of time arguing on the internet, well, because it's wasting time arguing on the internet.

I, like most Americans, spent a few months before forming an opinion of how Obama would govern. He campaigned like a moderate but went too far left on major initiatives while exaggerating credit for all sorts of things (see: "saved and created" jobs) and blaming Bush constantly.

I saw him today complaining that we've been in Afghanistan without a strategy for 8 years. He was in the Senate for 4 (running for President for 2 of them) and has been President for 1. He called it a war of necessity. How does he not have a strategy in mind? In reality, this is just like the public option where's he stuck between satisfying the left and leading the country.

admiralsnackbar 11-25-09 03:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheLadiesMike (Post 1173053)
Dude, I have been a member of this board since I found it right after the 2003 championship so I don't know how I've been disappointing you for a decade. I don't waste a lot of time arguing on the internet, well, because it's wasting time arguing on the internet.

I, like most Americans, spent a few months before forming an opinion of how Obama would govern. He campaigned like a moderate but went too far left on major initiatives while exaggerating credit for all sorts of things (see: "saved and created" jobs) and blaming Bush constantly.

I saw him today complaining that we've been in Afghanistan without a strategy for 8 years. He was in the Senate for 4 (running for President for 2 of them) and has been President for 1. He called it a war of necessity. How does he not have a strategy in mind? In reality, this is just like the public option where's he stuck between satisfying the left and leading the country.

See? I know you have insight to share, man. It's just frustrating to me that you so often succumb to doing drive-by one-liners, especially since you've played politics for X years.

I'm not calling you out because I think you're a fool -- we've never had any shortage of them here, and I don't care how they come and go. I do it because you seem to shrug-off discussions in which you contribute, and you've done it for 6 years if not a decade. I just wonder : if you don't want to try to back up the things you post, why do you bother posting? Just saying, man. Defend your points more often. Otherwise you just seem like the dearly departed news-bot, posting BS with no reference. Happy thanksgiving :banana

Dasher 11-28-09 07:34 PM

Quote:

One year later, the nation is a lot more sober with the reality of what change really is, and what was necessary to bring change about. The most amazing thing about the past year is the short memories everybody seems to have about how bad things really were. People seem to have forgotten that the economy was in a freefall, two misguided wars were draining the U.S. treasury ,and we had little goodwill to be found anywhere around the globe.
Yeah people forget he inherited this **** he didn't start it. How could any of you think that after 1 year he was going to fix everything that Bush and his cronies did in 8? Answer me that!!!!

WhiteChocolateJr 11-29-09 09:22 AM

^^^ That's the point at which most Republicans lose their credibility in my eyes. The attacks on 9/11 are obviously not W's fault, because a) he'd only been President a short while, and b) W inherited the military preparedness (or lack thereof) of the Clinton administration. Somehow, that same argument gets forgotten when we're talking about Afghanistan, Iraq, Fort Hood, etc. and President Obama's inability to cure the world in those same short months.

frenchfred 01-17-10 02:34 AM

Anyway anything he can do will be better than what Bush did. Bush had to be the worst president in US history: bringing the economy down and going to war on false premises, which in itself should be enough to send him to jail and all the other crap.

JTD 01-19-10 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhiteChocolateJr (Post 1173572)
^^^ That's the point at which most Republicans lose their credibility in my eyes. The attacks on 9/11 are obviously not W's fault, because a) he'd only been President a short while, and b) W inherited the military preparedness (or lack thereof) of the Clinton administration. Somehow, that same argument gets forgotten when we're talking about Afghanistan, Iraq, Fort Hood, etc. and President Obama's inability to cure the world in those same short months.

9-11 was about power in the middle east. We just happened to be the country they targeted. Knock down the biggest guy and you show your power. Then Bush used it to start a war so oil companies and contractors (ie Bush and Cheney family business) could profit. I don't understand how anyone who is considered "middle" to "lower" class can support any republican. They only care about rich people. I'm pretty sure there are no rich people posting in this forum.:richb

Birn 01-19-10 11:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JTD (Post 1181445)
9-11 was about power in the middle east. We just happened to be the country they targeted. Knock down the biggest guy and you show your power. Then Bush used it to start a war so oil companies and contractors (ie Bush and Cheney family business) could profit. I don't understand how anyone who is considered "middle" to "lower" class can support any republican. They only care about rich people. I'm pretty sure there are no rich people posting in this forum.:richb

I'm not rich but what you said was incredibly stupid. We didn't just happen to be the country that was targeted. The terrorists have hated America for many years. Has nothing to do with Bush. This has been going on for several decades, pal.

I would suggest that you get educated a little and investigate the facts. You talk like a little child who has no clue about what's really going on with our country.

JTD 01-20-10 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Birn (Post 1181461)
I'm not rich but what you said was incredibly stupid. We didn't just happen to be the country that was targeted. The terrorists have hated America for many years. Has nothing to do with Bush. This has been going on for several decades, pal.

I would suggest that you get educated a little and investigate the facts. You talk like a little child who has no clue about what's really going on with our country.


SHUT UP!! You need to stop getting your facts from FOX News. Terrorist have hated america for many years! What kind of statement is that??? Talk about a half ass retort! I didn't blame bush for the attack. I blamed bush for starting a war for no reason! If you believe other wise, then you are in denial! Moron!

Jose_TheGenius 01-20-10 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Birn (Post 1181461)
I'm not rich but what you said was incredibly stupid. We didn't just happen to be the country that was targeted. The terrorists have hated America for many years. Has nothing to do with Bush. This has been going on for several decades, pal.

I would suggest that you get educated a little and investigate the facts. You talk like a little child who has no clue about what's really going on with our country.

Bush alienated the US from other countries. if you didn't agree with the war on Iraq (which was about greed, oil, and NOTHING to do with 9/11) you were our enemy. that was the problem. "you're either with us or against us" and shoving his false view of christianity down people's throats because he thought he was carrying out God's will by launching a phony war, getting us in debt, and killing our troops for a war that should have never happened is why Bush is looked down on, not only by us, but by the world.

you sound like you're getting your stuff from FOX news, which isn't news at all. they're bias to the extreme. guys like Glenn Beck are what's wrong with this country. these are the same guys attacking Obama for doing right, stuff that Bush didn't do.

what about after 9/11 with that shoe bomber before X-Mas? it took Bush 6 days or so to make an announcement, only took Obama around 2-3 days to make an announcement about the most recent X-Mas attempt and these guys are killing him for that but love that Bush took so long. hypocrital!

what about Katrina and Haiti? how long did it take Bush to send help to New Orleans? around a week or so right? now Obama gets grilled because he sent help to Haiti way too quick (from guys like Limbaugh). i guess helping people who need it fast is a bad thing. hypocritical!

what about when the Fox News crew grilled Obama for inviting the "liberals" to the White House and not them? the good reason would be because it's all opinion and not news, but they attacked him for that. but of course they didn't mention that Bush only invited the Fox News people to the White House after 9/11 so they could air his propaganda on the war and did not invite the "liberal" media. hypocritical!

if Obama wasn't in this mess the Bush Administration did, there would be no arguing about Barack. we wouldn't have a poor economy, no stimulus packages, no federal debt, no nothing. but of course, for some reason, there's people out there who wouldn't mind having Bush again, you know, if you love not having money and sending your family to a war we shouldn't be in.

Cheddar 03-03-10 02:32 PM

Obese people don't get obese overnight and they don't get skinny that way either. A lot of this mess will probably still be in need of fixing after Obama's out of office. After the economy recovers, deficit reduction NEEDS to be a huge priority.

Money4Nothing 03-09-10 09:40 AM

Fox News and Glenn Beck is not what's wrong with this country. They are Symptoms of what is wrong with this country. Nearly every news media personality from Jack McCafferty to John Hannity to Lou Dobbs to Rick Sanchez simply reveal what is wrong:

People would rather be entertained by news than informed by it.

Fox News and CNN aren't doing anything suprising. It's the people that are vegging in front of it with their brains turned off then voting for whoever the retarded anchor just butt-kissed that's the problem. (e.g. Glen Beck and his hardon for Sarah Palin)

$


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:12 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.7.4


Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0