PDA

View Full Version : Rate President Obama.



SarasotaRepub
03-29-2011, 12:22 PM
Poll Question

On a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is "Empty Suit" and 5 is "God" , where do you place our current FearLess Leader???

txradioguy
03-29-2011, 12:32 PM
Poll Question

On a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is "Empty Suit" and 5 is "God" , where do you place our current FearLess Leader???

Zero. :D

Rebel Yell
03-29-2011, 12:40 PM
I'll give him a 2, just for giving the order to take out the pirates that had American hostages.

Gingersnap
03-29-2011, 12:41 PM
I'm with Rebel on this one.

noonwitch
03-29-2011, 12:47 PM
3-not the worst, but he could be better.

NJCardFan
03-29-2011, 01:04 PM
3-not the worst, but he could be better.

A major disaster in the country of an ally. Major uprisings in the middle east. Economy here is in shambles. But our president is golfing and playing soccer in Brazil. He's an empty suit.

Bailey
03-29-2011, 02:06 PM
I wish there was a choice below Empty Suit cause he has earned it. :(:mad:

eagleexpress
03-29-2011, 02:12 PM
Negative 5:D

Apache
03-29-2011, 02:36 PM
A major disaster in the country of an ally. Major uprisings in the middle east. Economy here is in shambles. But our president is golfing and playing soccer in Brazil. He's an empty suit.

BINGO!

AmPat
03-29-2011, 03:09 PM
Worse than the previous worst in half the time. At least Jimmah knew where to sit his ignorant butt when the nation needed a president resident. O Blah Blah uses his teleprompter skills from afar after the poll tells him what to do.

The poll should have had some negative numbers reflecting: -1. Has no business near the office

Odysseus
03-29-2011, 03:35 PM
The absolute, unadulterated, acid test for the worst. All other future screw-ups, dilletantes and incompetents will by judged on the Obama scale, just as they used to be judged against Jimmy Carter.

I'll give him a 2, just for giving the order to take out the pirates that had American hostages.
Obama actually hit the roof when the SEALs took out the pirates. He took credit for it after the fact.

3-not the worst, but he could be better.
Who in the name of national security was worse?

noonwitch
03-29-2011, 03:39 PM
The absolute, unadulterated, acid test for the worst. All other future screw-ups, dilletantes and incompetents will by judged on the Obama scale, just as they used to be judged against Jimmy Carter.

Obama actually hit the roof when the SEALs took out the pirates. He took credit for it after the fact.

Who in the name of national security was worse?


Hoover, Taft, Carter, Wilson to name a few.

Arroyo_Doble
03-29-2011, 04:15 PM
Who in the name of national security was worse?

Several prior to the 20th Century (Buchanan will always be the worst ... until we have another civil war, anyway) but recently, I would say both George W. Bush and Jimmy Carter were worse. George W. Bush is the modern Mendoza Line for presidents. Obama isn't even close to that.

Apache
03-29-2011, 04:21 PM
Several prior to the 20th Century (Buchanan will always be the worst ... until we have another civil war, anyway) but recently, I would say both George W. Bush and Jimmy Carter were worse. George W. Bush is the modern Mendoza Line for presidents. Obama isn't even close to that.

You got that right! He'd hafta do one bang up job the rest of his term, to even reach that high...:cool:

RobJohnson
03-29-2011, 04:34 PM
He created a victory for the right in 2010....I think he is a god. :p

Apache
03-29-2011, 04:40 PM
He created a victory for the right in 2010....I think he is a god. :p

Put down the bottle, and back away slowly.....:eek:

Odysseus
03-29-2011, 04:54 PM
Hoover, Taft, Carter, Wilson to name a few.


Several prior to the 20th Century (Buchanan will always be the worst ... until we have another civil war, anyway) but recently, I would say both George W. Bush and Jimmy Carter were worse. George W. Bush is the modern Mendoza Line for presidents. Obama isn't even close to that.

Sorry, but no. First, W. isn't even remotely as screwed up as the Community Organizer in Chief. In terms of every possible area, Bush comes off as better than Obama. Spending into a hole? Bush was bad, but Obama has set a new standard for profligacy. Executive overreach in foreign policy? Bush went to congress before invading Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama didn't, and say what you wil, but everybody and their brother thought that Saddam had WMDs (and there is significant evidence today that he did, but that's another argument), but there is no US interest served by siding with al Qaeda against Qaddafi. As for the others...

Hoover: Inept, certainly, but engaged. No one ever called him lazy. Obama? Can't even be bothered to read his own signature piece of legislation.

Carter: The former gold standard of incompetence, Mr. Malaise sucked up to our enemies and attacked our friends, but when it came down to it, Carter didn't spend the hostage crisis on the golf course. He was clueless, but dedicated.

Taft: Not even close. Although he annoyed TR enough to launch the Bull Moose Party (and hand the presidency to Woodrow Wilson, who also deserves to be on the list), Taft gets an unfair rap from historians. He was actually more effective at busting trusts than Roosevelt, for one thing. Regardless of what you thought of his policies, he wasn't incompetent. Sorry, but not even close.

Wilson: A fascist who tried to impose socialism, codified bigotry into the Federal Register, and a pie-eyed fool in foreign policy, but a man of genuine accomplishment prior to his election and a hard-working executive. Certainly in the bottom three, with Carter and the Big O.

And now, the Obama indictment:

Politicized the Justice Department: Did Wilson use the DOJ to pursue an agenda? Absolutely. But even Wilson stopped short of attacking states for enforcing the law, and if he was overly zealous in prosecuting people who spoke out against him, he at least prosecuted people who broke the law, as well. Obama's DOJ dropped open and shut cases against the New Black Panthers for voter intimidation and refused to defend laws passed by congress.

Incompetence: Didn't like how W. handled Katrina? Then the Gulf Oil Spill must've been a real burn for you. Not only did Obama not act, but he refused to allow other nations with available equipment and skills to assist. His administration falsified parts of the report from the experts to create the impression that they favored his drilling moratorium, and is currently in contempt of court for refusing to lift it.

Corruption: Thought Clinton was corrupt? How about Harding? Did either of them take over two of the largest corporations in the US and violate the bankruptcy laws to hand equity to union cronies? How about annexing 1/7 of the economy and then issuing waivers to his political allies, who fought for his takeover in the first place? Still not enough? Nixon was excoriated for stonewalling congress, but Obama has raised it to an art.

Fecklessness: Carter thought that Arafat was a swell guy, but at least he didn't bow to him. We've had other presidents who've been hostile to one or two allies, but never in the history of the United States have we had one who seems to take delight in casually insulting and alienating our allies and sucking up to our enemies. Obama's snubs to our allies in Britain, Egypt, Israel, South Korea and Honduras would be bad enough, but his refusal to criticize the mullahs when they slaughtered the Irania opposition may be the single most disgraceful thing that he has done in foreign policy, with the possible exception of his apology tour.

His detachment from his duties is legendary. Obama has spent more time golfing than he has spent on national security. He met his Afghanistan commander once, and couldn't be bothered to actually read up on the war before the meeting, waited months to decide whether or not to approve a plan that he eventually (and arbitrarily) gutted, but when Rolling Stone did a hatchet job on GEN McChristol, Obama had him on the carpet within a day. He's thin-skinned, petty and utterly lacking in leadership skills. He's filled his cabinet with corrupt, incompetent ideologues whose only merit in his eyes is that they seem to loathe America as much as he does.

He's not just an empty suit, he's an empty suit who can't be bothered to put on a tie when he's discussing the murders of 13 of his Soldiers, who thinks that a shout out before dealing with a terrorist act is appropriate, who loves our enemies and attacks our allies, who can't be bothered to do his job, but who will make damned sure that the Governor of Arizona can't do hers, who sticks his nose into a minor disturbance without knowing any of the facts and ends up insulting every police agency in the country, who has added more debt in two years than all of his predecessors combined, and who lacks even the most basic understanding of just how badly he's bungled his job.

Apache
03-29-2011, 05:04 PM
Sorry, but no. First, W. isn't even remotely as screwed up as the Community Organizer in Chief. In terms of every possible area, Bush comes off as better than Obama. Spending into a hole? Bush was bad, but Obama has set a new standard for profligacy. Executive overreach in foreign policy? Bush went to congress before invading Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama didn't, and say what you wil, but everybody and their brother thought that Saddam had WMDs (and there is significant evidence today that he did, but that's another argument), but there is no US interest served by siding with al Qaeda against Qaddafi. As for the others...

Hoover: Inept, certainly, but engaged. No one ever called him lazy. Obama? Can't even be bothered to read his own signature piece of legislation.

Carter: The former gold standard of incompetence, Mr. Malaise sucked up to our enemies and attacked our friends, but when it came down to it, Carter didn't spend the hostage crisis on the golf course. He was clueless, but dedicated.

Taft: Not even close. Although he annoyed TR enough to launch the Bull Moose Party (and hand the presidency to Woodrow Wilson, who also deserves to be on the list), Taft gets an unfair rap from historians. He was actually more effective at busting trusts than Roosevelt, for one thing. Regardless of what you thought of his policies, he wasn't incompetent. Sorry, but not even close.

Wilson: A fascist who tried to impose socialism, codified bigotry into the Federal Register, and a pie-eyed fool in foreign policy, but a man of genuine accomplishment prior to his election and a hard-working executive. Certainly in the bottom three, with Carter and the Big O.

And now, the Obama indictment:

Politicized the Justice Department: Did Wilson use the DOJ to pursue an agenda? Absolutely. But even Wilson stopped short of attacking states for enforcing the law, and if he was overly zealous in prosecuting people who spoke out against him, he at least prosecuted people who broke the law, as well. Obama's DOJ dropped open and shut cases against the New Black Panthers for voter intimidation and refused to defend laws passed by congress.

Incompetence: Didn't like how W. handled Katrina? Then the Gulf Oil Spill must've been a real burn for you. Not only did Obama not act, but he refused to allow other nations with available equipment and skills to assist. His administration falsified parts of the report from the experts to create the impression that they favored his drilling moratorium, and is currently in contempt of court for refusing to lift it.

Corruption: Thought Clinton was corrupt? How about Harding? Did either of them take over two of the largest corporations in the US and violate the bankruptcy laws to hand equity to union cronies? How about annexing 1/7 of the economy and then issuing waivers to his political allies, who fought for his takeover in the first place? Still not enough? Nixon was excoriated for stonewalling congress, but Obama has raised it to an art.

Fecklessness: Carter thought that Arafat was a swell guy, but at least he didn't bow to him. We've had other presidents who've been hostile to one or two allies, but never in the history of the United States have we had one who seems to take delight in casually insulting and alienating our allies and sucking up to our enemies. Obama's snubs to our allies in Britain, Egypt, Israel, South Korea and Honduras would be bad enough, but his refusal to criticize the mullahs when they slaughtered the Irania opposition may be the single most disgraceful thing that he has done in foreign policy, with the possible exception of his apology tour.

His detachment from his duties is legendary. Obama has spent more time golfing than he has spent on national security. He met his Afghanistan commander once, and couldn't be bothered to actually read up on the war before the meeting, waited months to decide whether or not to approve a plan that he eventually (and arbitrarily) gutted, but when Rolling Stone did a hatchet job on GEN McChristol, Obama had him on the carpet within a day. He's thin-skinned, petty and utterly lacking in leadership skills. He's filled his cabinet with corrupt, incompetent ideologues whose only merit in his eyes is that they seem to loathe America as much as he does.

He's not just an empty suit, he's an empty suit who can't be bothered to put on a tie when he's discussing the murders of 13 of his Soldiers, who thinks that a shout out before dealing with a terrorist act is appropriate, who loves our enemies and attacks our allies, who can't be bothered to do his job, but who will make damned sure that the Governor of Arizona can't do hers, who sticks his nose into a minor disturbance without knowing any of the facts and ends up insulting every police agency in the country, who has added more debt in two years than all of his predecessors combined, and who lacks even the most basic understanding of just how badly he's bungled his job.

Damn. Ouch. Mark.

RobJohnson
03-29-2011, 05:20 PM
Originally Posted by Odysseus
<snip>

http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-score010.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys.php)

Arroyo_Doble
03-29-2011, 06:09 PM
Sorry, but no. First, W. isn't even remotely as screwed up as the Community Organizer in Chief.

Good to see you take the conversation seriously.

Regardless:


In terms of every possible area, Bush comes off as better than Obama. Spending into a hole? Bush was bad, but Obama has set a new standard for profligacy.

Without the Reconciliation Acts of the early Aughts and the Trillion Dollar (probably more) Blunder, we aren’t having this conversation. The fiscal mess started prior to January of 2009.


Executive overreach in foreign policy? Bush went to congress before invading Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama didn't,

Let me know when we mobilize to invade and occupy another nation. As far as air strikes, I doubt every president who has engaged in such action has first gotten a vote in Congress (I know for a fact St Reagan didn’t). Also, the vote on the first Gulf War occurred January 12, 1991. How many assets did Bush the Greater move before that date?


that and say what you wil, but everybody and their brother thought that Saddam had WMDs (and there is significant evidence today that he did, but that's another argument), but there is no US interest served by siding with al Qaeda against Qaddafi. As for the others...

The invasion and occupation of Iraq was the greatest strategic blunder in the history of the United States since Ft Sumter was fired upon. Waffle fries about WMD is embarrassing. I am surprised you went to it.


Hoover: Inept, certainly, but engaged. No one ever called him lazy. Obama? Can't even be bothered to read his own signature piece of legislation.

The Legislative Branch of the United States writes law. The Executive can suggest, help, cajole, whatever but when it comes down to it, the only “signature” that matters on legislation is whether or not his will be on it after it is passed. And even then, with enough congressman, not even that.


Carter: The former gold standard of incompetence, Mr. Malaise sucked up to our enemies and attacked our friends, but when it came down to it, Carter didn't spend the hostage crisis on the golf course. He was clueless, but dedicated.

What is it with you guys not wanting Obama on the golf course? It is getting weird.


Politicized the Justice Department: Did Wilson use the DOJ to pursue an agenda? Absolutely. But even Wilson stopped short of attacking states for enforcing the law, and if he was overly zealous in prosecuting people who spoke out against him, he at least prosecuted people who broke the law, as well. Obama's DOJ dropped open and shut cases against the New Black Panthers for voter intimidation and refused to defend laws passed by congress.

You cannot be serious invoking that Fox “News” bullshit scary black guy crap? A couple of douchebags play acting thug is what you have? Really? If white people are being intimidated at the polls so bad by all these scary black guys, with the sanction of the scary black guy Attorney General and scary black guys at the DOJ, why do you only have some gonzo “journalist” tape from years ago (with white people walking around decidedly un-intimidated)? I would think there would be scores of video.


Incompetence: Didn't like how W. handled Katrina? Then the Gulf Oil Spill must've been a real burn for you. Not only did Obama not act, but he refused to allow other nations with available equipment and skills to assist. His administration falsified parts of the report from the experts to create the impression that they favored his drilling moratorium, and is currently in contempt of court for refusing to lift it.

Katrina embarrassed us. Watching what has happened in Japan makes it even worse.

Not sure what equivalency you are trying to make with that and the Gulf Oil Spill unless you are talking about government agency incompetence.


Corruption: Thought Clinton was corrupt?

No, not really.


How about Harding? Did either of them take over two of the largest corporations in the US and violate the bankruptcy laws to hand equity to union cronies?

Too funny. The fact that Obama (and Bush) saved GM, and probably the entire parts chain and therefore American automobile manufacturing, at near zero cost galls you guys. You would rather have American workers by the millions unemployed than for Obama to succeed so all you can do from the peanut gallery is whine about unions. Unbelievable.


How about annexing 1/7 of the economy and then issuing waivers to his political allies, who fought for his takeover in the first place?

Find a way to do it better and get a waiver. You don’t have to be an “ally” of Obama.

Also, The Affordable Care Act is a law, not an Executive Order.


Still not enough?

No enough? It’s not anything but typical affirmation radio garbage used to stroke the like minded. Trying to find a valid criticism in that is like trying to find a wholesome meal for the family in a kettle of cotton candy.


Nixon was excoriated for stonewalling congress, but Obama has raised it to an art.

That’s vague enough to skip.


Fecklessness: Carter thought that Arafat was a swell guy, but at least he didn't bow to him.

Obama bowed to Arafat?


We've had other presidents who've been hostile to one or two allies, but never in the history of the United States have we had one who seems to take delight in casually insulting and alienating our allies and sucking up to our enemies. Obama's snubs to our allies in Britain, Egypt, Israel, South Korea and Honduras would be bad enough, but his refusal to criticize the mullahs when they slaughtered the Irania opposition may be the single most disgraceful thing that he has done in foreign policy, with the possible exception of his apology tour.

Good lord, I’ll just read Weekly Standard if I want to see so much nonsensical pearl clutching. Christ, George Herbert Walker Bush was the last president to actually stand up to Israel. Obama hasn’t even come close to having the balls to do so yet.


His detachment from his duties is legendary. Obama has spent more time golfing than he has spent on national security.

Waka waka waka … A parakeet, a goat and a Vulcan walk into a bar ….


He met his Afghanistan commander once, and couldn't be bothered to actually read up on the war before the meeting, waited months to decide whether or not to approve a plan that he eventually (and arbitrarily) gutted, but when Rolling Stone did a hatchet job on GEN McChristol, Obama had him on the carpet within a day. He's thin-skinned, petty and utterly lacking in leadership skills. He's filled his cabinet with corrupt, incompetent ideologues whose only merit in his eyes is that they seem to loathe America as much as he does.

Really? You think it is a good idea to have openly disrespectful military leadership in the chain of command? In a combat zone? At first, I though it showed weakness on Obama’s part in firing the general but now, I am not so sure. I like the American style civilian control of the military and if a soldier doesn’t, and cannot respect the chain of command, he should resign. MacArthur found that out the hard way.


He's not just an empty suit, he's an empty suit who can't be bothered to put on a tie when he's discussing the murders of 13 of his Soldiers, who thinks that a shout out before dealing with a terrorist act is appropriate, who loves our enemies and attacks our allies, who can't be bothered to do his job, but who will make damned sure that the Governor of Arizona can't do hers, who sticks his nose into a minor disturbance without knowing any of the facts and ends up insulting every police agency in the country, who has added more debt in two years than all of his predecessors combined, and who lacks even the most basic understanding of just how badly he's bungled his job.

This isn’t an argument; this is just bile.

BadCat
03-29-2011, 06:12 PM
He deserves very negative numbers, and any asshole who voted for him deserves to be deported.

fettpett
03-29-2011, 06:23 PM
Good to see you take the conversation seriously.

Regardless:



Without the Reconciliation Acts of the early Aughts and the Trillion Dollar (probably more) Blunder, we aren’t having this conversation. The fiscal mess started prior to January of 2009.

and you do know that Bush tried to get Congress to to take action as did McCain, and if they did, the whole meltdown thing wouldn't have happened




Let me know when we mobilize to invade and occupy another nation. As far as air strikes, I doubt every president who has engaged in such action has first gotten a vote in Congress (I know for a fact St Reagan didn’t). Also, the vote on the first Gulf War occurred January 12, 1991. How many assets did Bush the Greater move before that date?



yeah...GHW Bush didn't invade or attack Iraq until AFTER Congressional approval was given. We stationed troops in Saudi as a defensive measure but didn't take any offensive action till Jan 17, 1991. Yeah we defended both Saudi and Israel when SCUDS where shot at use but we didn't take any offensive actions.

lacarnut
03-29-2011, 06:26 PM
Zero. :D

Correct...a 1 that I gave him equals 20% which is way, way too high.

Wei Wu Wei
03-29-2011, 07:42 PM
hovering between 2 or 3

Kay
03-29-2011, 09:20 PM
Empty suit I say,
but only because there was no negative option in the poll.

Articulate_Ape
03-29-2011, 09:26 PM
I'll give him a 2, just for giving the order to take out the pirates that had American hostages.


Please. If the POTUS has to give a specific order to whack a few pirates on the high seas, then he is a micro-manager. Most micro-managers I have known do so only because they are empty suits. :rolleyes:

Obama is just a guy that has a tendency to nod his head to bad ideas and bow to bad people. He is out of his league and being played by people that have known this for years, but just needed a Bieber to counter our Gipper. He has no strong thinker by his side like GW Bush did (DARTH CHENEY!). He has instead a reincarnation of Gleason's equally daft foil: Norton.

Nope. If you are torn about whether he is an empty suit or not, ask yourself this: "Would you hire him to run your company?"

Nuff said.

PoliCon
03-29-2011, 11:08 PM
Poll Question

On a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is "Empty Suit" and 5 is "God" , where do you place our current FearLess Leader???

You should have made this a public poll so we can see who needs to be banned! :D

Sonnabend
03-29-2011, 11:09 PM
SR we needed an added option for "pathetic loser"

txradioguy
03-30-2011, 02:32 AM
To answer the Major's question about National Security and who was worse...I'd have to say Clinton for two reasons.

1. To my knowledge Obama has never ducked calls from the situation room when his approval was needed on an air strike on a known terrorist.


Did I mention the calls that Clinton avoided were in relation to an airstrike that could have taken out bin Laden?

2. President Obama has never...to anyone's knowledge...lost the launch codes for our nuclear arsenal. Codes that by the way...were never found.


Those two incidents right there put Billy Jeff at the top of the worst in handling National Security by a President list bar none.

KhrushchevsShoe
03-30-2011, 02:36 AM
3.

He's moving to reform things that need to be reformed but when it actually comes down the actual reform itself its just the same garbage ideas aimed at keeping the rich richer and middle class as the rich's pinata. I guess it might be the thought that counts but I'm so used to this crap that I'm fairly convinced he's just the digestable face put on undigestable legislation.

What keeps from being a 2 is he does carry the country as a whole pretty well. Buys us some international cred and peopel elsewhere generally dont mind the guy. If people follow his model of cultural consideration and open-mindedness about the rest of the world it'll probably soften the inevitable collapse of the American Empire.

txradioguy
03-30-2011, 02:56 AM
3.

He's moving to reform things that need to be reformed but when it actually comes down the actual reform itself its just the same garbage ideas aimed at keeping the rich richer and middle class as the rich's pinata. I guess it might be the thought that counts but I'm so used to this crap that I'm fairly convinced he's just the digestable face put on undigestable legislation.

What keeps from being a 2 is he does carry the country as a whole pretty well. Buys us some international cred and peopel elsewhere generally dont mind the guy. If people follow his model of cultural consideration and open-mindedness about the rest of the world it'll probably soften the inevitable collapse of the American Empire.


Wow you really broke out your knee pads for this one didn't you troll?

Sonnabend
03-30-2011, 03:49 AM
International cred???? That imbecile insulted every ally the US has, has proven grossly incompetent when BRIEFED on terror threats on this side of the pond, ignored one of his biggest allies after a major terrorist strike, is and was a pathetic bungler who didn't even have the brains to make sure the cheapass DVD set he gave away even WORKED... the man is so far out of his depth it's almost humiliating to watch him.

AmPat
03-30-2011, 10:53 AM
To answer the Major's question about National Security and who was worse...I'd have to say Clinton for two reasons.

1. To my knowledge Obama has never ducked calls from the situation room when his approval was needed on an air strike on a known terrorist.


Did I mention the calls that Clinton avoided were in relation to an airstrike that could have taken out bin Laden?

2. President Obama has never...to anyone's knowledge...lost the launch codes for our nuclear arsenal. Codes that by the way...were never found.


Those two incidents right there put Billy Jeff at the top of the worst in handling National Security by a President list bar none.

You forgot: selling missile technology to the Chinese and Hillary's perusing FBI files of political enemies. Both criminal and/or anti-American traitorous acts.
:mad:
Had a Conservative president done this, the press would have been in high wail mode. Since it was BJ Klintoon and his Kankle mate, no big deal.:mad: Somehow, Nixon is a criminal for his involvement in the breakin, the Clintons? Much loved by the liberal minions.:cool:

NJCardFan
03-30-2011, 01:26 PM
Without the Reconciliation Acts of the early Aughts and the Trillion Dollar (probably more) Blunder, we aren’t having this conversation. The fiscal mess started prior to January of 2009.
Yep, you're right. However, things didn't begin to go into the crapper until the Democrats retook congress. Funny how you left that out. And tell these people that Saddam didn't have WMD's:
http://www.liebreich.com/LDC/Images/Opinion/13505_5.gif

Odysseus
03-30-2011, 04:51 PM
Good to see you take the conversation seriously.
I do take it seriously. He has the power to make my wife a widow.


Regardless:
Without the Reconciliation Acts of the early Aughts and the Trillion Dollar (probably more) Blunder, we aren’t having this conversation. The fiscal mess started prior to January of 2009.
You must learn to link cause and effect. Exactly how can you blame Bush for the insolvency of Fannie and Freddy? For the "stimulus" bill (the single most expensive piece of legislation in US history, and the least effective)


Let me know when we mobilize to invade and occupy another nation. As far as air strikes, I doubt every president who has engaged in such action has first gotten a vote in Congress (I know for a fact St Reagan didn’t). Also, the vote on the first Gulf War occurred January 12, 1991. How many assets did Bush the Greater move before that date?
Doesn't matter how many he moved, what matters is that he went to congress before crossing a hostile border. And Reagan was retaliating for an act of war on Qaddafi's part. Remember the 5 April 1986, "La Belle" nightclub bombing in West Berlin that killed three people (including two American military personnel) and injured 229 more? That was an act of war against the US, and the single raid in response did not reflect anywhere near the commitment that we have now incurred in taking sides in a civil war between Qaddafi and al Qaeda.


The invasion and occupation of Iraq was the greatest strategic blunder in the history of the United States since Ft Sumter was fired upon. Waffle fries about WMD is embarrassing. I am surprised you went to it.
No, the greatest strategic blunder in US history was allowing Khomeini to return to Iran, then not allowing the Shah to fight his revolt. And if you want to claim that Saddam didn't have WMDs, well, good luck with that, but in fact, he had nine working nuclear research facilities at the time of the invasion, and according to UNSCOM Saddam had failed to account for 600 metric tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, VX and sarin, and nearly 25,000 rockets and 15,000 artillery shells, with chemical agents. We now know, thanks to the Israelis, that Saddam's WMD program was trucked to Syria during the two years that we played with the UN. But, hey, it's the only talking point that you have, so go with it.


The Legislative Branch of the United States writes law. The Executive can suggest, help, cajole, whatever but when it comes down to it, the only “signature” that matters on legislation is whether or not his will be on it after it is passed. And even then, with enough congressman, not even that.
The Executive Branch drafts budgets (or used to, before Obama abrogated that responsibility), and often provides draft legislation to the congress. That's why Clinton had his task force (led by Hillary) preparing the draft of what became known as Hillarycare. As a general rule, if you propose a piece of legislation, you also provide the draft. Obama couldn't be bothered.


What is it with you guys not wanting Obama on the golf course? It is getting weird.
It's not just golf. It's also multiple vacations (including vacations disguised as state visits), pickup basketball games, gala parties, trips to Broadway shows (on the taxpayers' dime), putting his NCAA brackets together instead of addressing a massive disaster that struck our closest Pacific ally and a host of other events that have nothing to do with doing his job, which reflects the fact that Obama wants nothing to do with doing his job. Does this guy do any work? Ever?


You cannot be serious invoking that Fox “News” bullshit scary black guy crap? A couple of douchebags play acting thug is what you have? Really? If white people are being intimidated at the polls so bad by all these scary black guys, with the sanction of the scary black guy Attorney General and scary black guys at the DOJ, why do you only have some gonzo “journalist” tape from years ago (with white people walking around decidedly un-intimidated)? I would think there would be scores of video.
You cannot be minimizing voter intimidation and threats along racial lines, and you certainly can't be dismissing the sworn testimony of DOJ lawyers that they were ordered to ignore cases brought against black plaintiffs? I guess some animals are more equal than others.


Katrina embarrassed us. Watching what has happened in Japan makes it even worse.
Katrina embarrassed us, all right, but most of the embarrassment was at the state and local level. Of course, the reporting on Katrina would have embarrassed our media if they were capable of feeling embarrassment, but that's beside the point. Understand that within the National Response Plan, disaster response and planning starts at the local government level. Mayor Nagin failed to execute the New Orleans disaster plan. For example, the plan called for the use of the city's school buses in evacuating residents, but the city never deployed the buses, but left them parked in an open lot, where they were destroyed by the flood. Another example? After the last scheduled AMTRAK train left New Orleans, Amtrak ran a special train with room for several hundred passengers, and they offered these seats to the city. The city declined so the train left New Orleans with no passengers. As for the state, do you really want to talk about Gov Blanco's performance? Louisiana National Guard troops were responsible for establishing order in advance of humanitarian relief efforts, but didn't. Federal troops couldn't do this because of the Posse Comitatus Act, which bars the federal military from enforcing state and local laws. Bush sent Blanco a request to take over command of law enforcement under the Insurrection Act, which is one of the few exceptions to the law, but she refused. She did request additional Guard troops (filed with National Guard Bureau a full two days after the hurricane hit and when much of the city was already under water). Had she done what Governor Barbour had done in Mississippi, which was activate the compact with the other states that would have allowed her to bypass NGB, she'd have had a full division at her command. Mayor Nagin accused Blanco of delaying federal aid, saying, "I was ready to move today. The governor said she needed 24 hours to make a decision. It would have been great if we could have [...] told the world that we had this all worked out. It didn't happen, and more people died." The Congressional Research Service investigation concluded, that Blanco never requested assistance with evacuation.


Not sure what equivalency you are trying to make with that and the Gulf Oil Spill unless you are talking about government agency incompetence.
So, you blame Bush for the Katrina response, but don't blame Obama for the Gulf Oil Spill response? And, as I pointed out above, it wasn't Bush who was derelict during Katrina, it was the local and state governments. But in the Gulf Spill, Obama took specific actions that exacerbated the crisis. He refused to relax federal regulations that would have allowed foreign skimmer craft in to help contain the spill (they weren't manned by union crews, you see...). When Louisiana went out and rented their own skimmers, Obama's Coast Guard rep siezed them. When Governor Jindal met Obama in New Orleans two weeks after the spill (yes, it was 2 weeks before Obama bothered to show up) he attacked Jindal for a letter sent the Secretary of Agriculture requesting aid in the form of food stamps for those who had been thrown out of work because of the spill, but didn't discuss anything else with Jindal, because in Obama's world, a slight is more important than actually taking action to protect the people who he governs.

Odysseus
03-30-2011, 04:52 PM
No, not really.
You must not have been paying attention. Here's a partial list. Have fun:


Whitewater (and the Whitewater billing records stonewall)
Hillary's Cattle Futures Lie
Travelgate
Filegate
Vince Foster
Paula Jones
Lincoln bedroom bed and breakfast
White House coffees
Donations from convicted drug and weapons dealers
Buddhist Temple fundraiser
Web Hubbell hush money
Lewinsky Affair
Perjury and jobs for Lewinsky
Kathleen Willey assault and cover up
Web Hubbell prison phone call
Selling NORAL Military Technology to the PLA
Jaunita Broaddrick rape
Vandalizing the White House before leaving
Looting the White House before leaving
Sale of pardons



Too funny. The fact that Obama (and Bush) saved GM, and probably the entire parts chain and therefore American automobile manufacturing, at near zero cost galls you guys. You would rather have American workers by the millions unemployed than for Obama to succeed so all you can do from the peanut gallery is whine about unions. Unbelievable.
Obama "saved" GM the way that Rome "saved" Carthage, except that instead of salting the earth, he turned it over to his union cronies. Of course, raping the bondholders who lent GM billions, and who, by law, were supposed to be the first to be repaid, is just par for the course when you see capitalists as the enemy.


Find a way to do it better and get a waiver. You don’t have to be an “ally” of Obama.
We've been doing it better for decades. It's called "the private sector." And you may not have to be an "ally" of Obama's (i.e., poltical crony), but it sure seems to help. Here's the list, on HHS' website (http://www.hhs.gov/ociio/regulations/approved_applications_for_waiver.html), but to understand the degree of cronyism, you have to realize that many of the employers exempted are union shops or companies that fought tooth and nail for Obamacare (Starbucks, for example). Here's a partial list:

The Service Employees Benefit Fund
United Food and Commercial Workers Allied Trade Health & Welfare Trust Fund
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Union No. 195
Asbestos Workers Local 53 Welfare Fund
Employees Security Funds
Plumbers & Pipefitters Local 123 Welfare Fund
United Food and Commercial Workers Local 227
United Food and Commercial Workers Maximus Local 455
Service Employees International Union Local 25
United Food and Commercial Workers Local 1262
Musicians Health Fund Local 802
Hospitality Benefit Fund Local 17
Transport Workers Union
United Federation of Teachers Welfare Fund
International Union of Painters and Allied Trades (AFL-CIO)


Also, The Affordable Care Act is a law, not an Executive Order.
Actually, it's a law that's been struck down and is awaiting Supreme Court review, but until then, it's in limbo, but the administration doesn't seem to grasp that, as they keep allocating funds to implement it.


No enough? It’s not anything but typical affirmation radio garbage used to stroke the like minded. Trying to find a valid criticism in that is like trying to find a wholesome meal for the family in a kettle of cotton candy.
Your response is the typical liberal talking point blather that passes for a response when you can't actually argue your points.

That’s vague enough to skip.
So, you're asking for more detail? Why certainly. The Obama administration has stonewalled congress and the courts on a number of issues, even landing itself in contempt. A sample:

The administration barred federal police and US military personnel from testifying before congress in the FT Hood congressional inquiry.
The DOJ has refused to allow the Civil Rights Division attorneys answer congressional investigators regarding the Black Panther case.
The administration's doctoring of the Oil Spill report and subsequent reimposition of the drilling ban after it was lifted by a judge, has resulted in a contempt citation.
The White House refused to release documents related to potential job offers made to two Democratic Senate primary challengers, Andrew Romanoff in Colorado and Joe Sestak in Pennsylvania.
Congress is fighting the Department of Justice over documents detailing Operation Fast and Furious, described as a "botched gunrunning sting set up by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives that funneled more than 1,700 smuggled weapons from Arizona to Mexico" and that has resulted in the deaths of "dozens, if not hundreds of Mexicans."


Obama bowed to Arafat?
No. Arafat may be the one Arab leader that Obama hasn't bowed to, but then, Arafat is dead.


Good lord, I’ll just read Weekly Standard if I want to see so much nonsensical pearl clutching. Christ, George Herbert Walker Bush was the last president to actually stand up to Israel. Obama hasn’t even come close to having the balls to do so yet.
Wow. In the parlance of my rater, that's more wrong than a football bat. Obama has deliberately insulted the Israeli PM, attacked Israel over the building of housing units in its own capital city and provided aid to regimes that are virulently anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic.

Waka waka waka … A parakeet, a goat and a Vulcan walk into a bar ….
Yeah, I'm the one who's not taking this discussino seriously. :rolleyes:


Really? You think it is a good idea to have openly disrespectful military leadership in the chain of command? In a combat zone? At first, I though it showed weakness on Obama’s part in firing the general but now, I am not so sure. I like the American style civilian control of the military and if a soldier doesn’t, and cannot respect the chain of command, he should resign. MacArthur found that out the hard way.
I'd have been a lot more sympathetic if any of the comments made had actually been made by the CG, rather than his staff (in what were supposed to be off the record sessions (so much for Rolling Stone's journalistic ethics), and if he'd bothered to meet with McChrystol or had been even remotely engaged on Afghanistan. And remember that MacArthur had deliberately undermined Truman's policies for months before he was fired, even going so far as to threaten the Chinese while Truman was trying to negotiate an end to the Korean War. Equating bar talk among staffers with a prolonged pattern of insubordination by a theater commander is BS.


This isn’t an argument; this is just bile.
No, it's a litany of Obama screw ups, failures and deliberate malfeasance. Addressing it by not addressing it is typical.

3.

He's moving to reform things that need to be reformed but when it actually comes down the actual reform itself its just the same garbage ideas aimed at keeping the rich richer and middle class as the rich's pinata. I guess it might be the thought that counts but I'm so used to this crap that I'm fairly convinced he's just the digestable face put on undigestable legislation.

What keeps from being a 2 is he does carry the country as a whole pretty well. Buys us some international cred and peopel elsewhere generally dont mind the guy. If people follow his model of cultural consideration and open-mindedness about the rest of the world it'll probably soften the inevitable collapse of the American Empire.
What color is the sky in your world?

Wei Wu Wei
03-30-2011, 05:02 PM
lmao at the idea that Obama is anti-Israel

Odysseus
03-30-2011, 06:27 PM
lmao at the idea that Obama is anti-Israel

LMAO at the idea that you had an idea.

But, by all means, feel free to cite a Pravda article in his defense. :rolleyes:

Speaking of which, did you miss where I cited actual CDC numbers from the 1930s to refute your "source"? I didn't see a reply, so you must not have gone back to that thread, since any honest man who'd been so thoroughly spanked would have been honor bound to admit it.

Wei Wu Wei
03-30-2011, 07:15 PM
LMAO at the idea that you had an idea.

But, by all means, feel free to cite a Pravda article in his defense. :rolleyes:

Speaking of which, did you miss where I cited actual CDC numbers from the 1930s to refute your "source"? I didn't see a reply, so you must not have gone back to that thread, since any honest man who'd been so thoroughly spanked would have been honor bound to admit it.

NAh it's cool about the numbers in that thread like I said i don't really know the exact figures so your numbers might be right, i'm cool with that.

as for this Israel thing, come on now, just recently the United States used it's Veto in the UN to block a nearly unanimous official condemnation as illegal of the continued Israeli settlements.

Obama and some democrats may, in some contexts, try to appear somewhat objective on the issue of Israel but the reality is that the America-Israel relationship is very strong, there is a very strong Israeli lobby in the US affecting lawmakers.

When it comes to financial aid, military support, and foreign policy (particularly in the middle east), the USA is clearly, firmly, and near-totally pro-Israel.

Sonnabend
03-31-2011, 02:33 AM
as for this Israel thing, come on now, just recently the United States used it's Veto in the UN to block a nearly unanimous official condemnation as illegal of the continued Israeli settlements (http://api.getsmartlinks.com/r?app_id=url_fixer&guid=2BE51D12-AE44-390B-361E-AEB2D968924A&time=130155308&ref_hash=03ffb741&link_id=2435085&url=http:%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FIsraeli_S ettlements&cid=2&pid=1&sense=bXH_4t-fndd2KDjeS6448Q&hash=cc9caca3740cdd521564c43b42346d16).Yeah, the UN has "cred"...like putting Libya on a Human Rights Panel, or Iran on the Rights of Women..God don't you ever fact check the crap you spew?


When it comes to financial aid, military support, and foreign policy (particularly in the middle east), the USA is clearly, firmly, and near-totally pro-Israel (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/israel/index.html).

As it should be.

txradioguy
03-31-2011, 02:54 AM
lmao at the idea that Obama is anti-Israel

Please show us where he's not.

Odysseus
03-31-2011, 09:51 AM
NAh it's cool about the numbers in that thread like I said i don't really know the exact figures so your numbers might be right, i'm cool with that.

Oh, good. Then you admit that there was no mass starvation during the greatest economic crisis in the history of the United States? That capitalism is far more resilient than communism, and that by the objective standard of people not starving to death in the midst of plenty, communism fails yet again?


as for this Israel thing, come on now, just recently the United States used it's Veto in the UN to block a nearly unanimous official condemnation as illegal of the continued Israeli settlements.

Except that the veto only came came after the Palestinians rejected a compromise “presidential statement” that America was willing to support, which stated that the UN “does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlement activity, which is a serious obstacle to the peace process.” Obama was willing to publicly attack Israel at one of the most blatantly anti-Israeli forums in the world, and only relented when the Arabs wouldn't agree to less inflammatory language. You don't treat your allies like that, but Obama doesn't seem to understand that. As the Daily Caller (http://dailycaller.com/2011/02/21/thedc-analysis-three-takeaways-from-obama-admin%E2%80%99s-willingness-to-support-israel-condemnation-at-the-united-nations/)put it, , "just as you don’t go to a Klu Klux Klan meeting to discuss problems in the black community, America shouldn’t being joining in the Israel bashing that routinely occurs at the United Nations."

What makes the settlements illegal? Why should Jews not be allowed to settle among Arabs? Why is it that the West Bank should be Judenrein? And Obama has not only attacked Israel for allowing settlements on the West Bank, he has attacked Israel for expanding housing in Jerusalem, which is the capital of Israel. Should Israel object when Obama's expanded DC bureaucracy drives up housing construction in Maryland and Virginia?

When Jordan first conquered the West Bank, it annexed it, in violation of international law and a host of UN resolutions. When Jordan used the West Bank as a staging area to attack Israel in 1967, Israel drove the Jordanians back to their original (legal) border. The Palestinian Arabs in the region had no claims to anything except the camps that the Jordanians put them in, having left their homes in what became Israel in order to allow the Arab armies a free hand. Israel would have been within its rights to expel them, as the Arab states had done with their Jewish populations.


Obama and some democrats may, in some contexts, try to appear somewhat objective on the issue of Israel but the reality is that the America-Israel relationship is very strong, there is a very strong Israeli lobby in the US affecting lawmakers.

You have the Orwellian language distortions down pat. Obama isn't "objective" towards Israel. He treats Israel with a horrific double standard (as do you).


When it comes to financial aid, military support, and foreign policy (particularly in the middle east), the USA is clearly, firmly, and near-totally pro-Israel.

And when it comes to reflecting American values of constitutional government, the rule of law, defense of liberty and American interests, Israel is completely pro-US. Can you show me an Arab or Muslim state with a similar record of support?

Arroyo_Doble
03-31-2011, 10:11 AM
And when it comes to reflecting American values of constitutional government, the rule of law, defense of liberty and American interests, Israel is completely pro-US. Can you show me an Arab or Muslim state with a similar record of support?

Turkey.

fettpett
03-31-2011, 10:27 AM
Turkey.

Turkey doesn't have full political freedom, in fact they have The Constitutional Court which "can strip the public financing of political parties that it deems anti-secular or separatist, or ban their existence altogether."

They've suppressed Kurds in the southern part of the country, they don't have a very good record with freedom of the press or with womens rights.

Now, that doesn't mean that they have been a valuable ally, but they been as good of one as Israel, they didn't let us go into Iraq from there at the last minute nor backed us much with other Arab countries

Odysseus
03-31-2011, 11:52 AM
Turkey.
Ten years ago, you'd have been right. But ever since 9/11, Turkey's ruling party has been moving the country in an anti-American direction. The most obvious example of this was Turkey's refusal to allow US forces to stage at Incirlik for the invasion of Iraq. They have also provided aid to Hamas and Hezbollah, both of which are virulently anti-American.