Change

[RedskinsDave]

Simply amazing. As someone who has spent many years hating Ted, it gives me great joy to know a Republican will now pass gas on his seat.

[tuckahoeskin]

Former State Senator, two years in the Senate....hey Scott Brown could be President in 2012! That's the going experience requirement, isn't it? :Peace:

[shally]

dont anyone kid themselves what this is:

this is about the incompetence of the Dem candidate
the arrogance of a party simply "assuming" that ANY Dem is owed Teddy's Seat
the high tax rates in Mass.
the fact that most folks up there already have health insurance
the Dem stimulus Bill
the unease about the economy
the attractiveness of Brown and the fact that he isnt scary, or looks like a religious nut-case who is more worried about gay sex than anything else...

but, that said, he will have the biggest target on his back of any Senator and has to run again in 2 years in the bluest state of all.. he has his work cut out for him..

nevertheless, it is a good thing for this country to see this kind of periodic flushing

[LATrueRedskin]

Anybody else hear him pimp his daughters out in front of America?

[Biggie]

Democrats do nothing but fail. I should have registered as an independent.

[dj_stouty]

I'm sure the Dems will hee and haw about how Brown's opponent made x-amount of mistakes here and there during the campaign. Truth is...a big message from a very liberal MA was sent to the country.

I despise Jim Webb...but the man is standing up for Brown to be admitted prior to any votes on healthcare. I respect that.

Now...will Obama slide towards the middle to try and appease the greater public...or will his ideology get it the way and continue to force these policies?

[RedskinsDave]

All indications are the dems will roll over and do nothing now that they don't have carte blanche and just blame the GOP for it. There have already been proclamations of gridlock in D.C. The 41 vote majority is so powerful. Somehow the GOP got things done (even bad things) when they had fewer votes.

[RedskinsDave]

Southers has taken his name out of the TSA job.

[Biggie]

All indications are the dems will roll over and do nothing now that they don't have carte blanche and just blame the GOP for it. There have already been proclamations of gridlock in D.C. The 41 vote majority is so powerful. Somehow the GOP got things done (even bad things) when they had fewer votes.
Jon Stewart asked the same question on his show a couple nights ago. GWB never had this kind of majority and he still did whatever the hell he wanted.

[Ibleedburgundy]

The big difference seems to be party unity. Republicans crack the whip, Democrats don't. Republicans are willing to drive the country off a cliff if it means making Democrats look bad. Democrats don't have the guts to do that, and I don't think the Democratic base would approve of putting party before country anyway.

BTW, Bush did not do whatever he wanted. He lost the social security battle even when he had both majorities. He also passed his tax cuts with a reconciliation meaning they expire after 10 years. Democrats could easily do that with healthcare reform if they wanted.

[Fathead]

The big difference seems to be party unity. Republicans crack the whip, Democrats don't. Republicans are willing to drive the country off a cliff if it means making Democrats look bad. Democrats don't have the guts to do that, and I don't think the Democratic base would approve of putting party before country anyway.

BTW, Bush did not do whatever he wanted. He lost the social security battle even when he had both majorities. He also passed his tax cuts with a reconciliation meaning they expire after 10 years. Democrats could easily do that with healthcare reform if they wanted.



Wait, I thought W was a tyrannical despot?

[RedskinsDave]

The big difference seems to be party unity. Republicans crack the whip, Democrats don't. Republicans are willing to drive the country off a cliff if it means making Democrats look bad. Democrats don't have the guts to do that, and I don't think the Democratic base would approve of putting party before country anyway.

Ha ha ha, even when you guys suck its because you're better than the GOP.

BTW, Bush did not do whatever he wanted. He lost the social security battle even when he had both majorities. He also passed his tax cuts with a reconciliation meaning they expire after 10 years. Democrats could easily do that with healthcare reform if they wanted.

Make up your mind. Either he and the GOP ran roughshod or they didn't. Don't act like the dems are above using reconciliation. They shoved the current bills down our throats and would continue to do so had Taxachusetts not put the brakes on it.

[akhhorus]

dont anyone kid themselves what this is:

this is about the incompetence of the Dem candidate
the arrogance of a party simply "assuming" that ANY Dem is owed Teddy's Seat
the high tax rates in Mass.
the fact that most folks up there already have health insurance
the Dem stimulus Bill
the unease about the economy
the attractiveness of Brown and the fact that he isnt scary, or looks like a religious nut-case who is more worried about gay sex than anything else...

but, that said, he will have the biggest target on his back of any Senator and has to run again in 2 years in the bluest state of all.. he has his work cut out for him..

nevertheless, it is a good thing for this country to see this kind of periodic flushing

+1. I don't envy Brown's 2 year term. He's either going to vote too conservatively under pressure from McConnell to keep his seat or he's going to vote too moderately and become the new Lieberman/Specter. I have a feeling that, if the Dems don't just pass the Senate bill in the House, Brown will cut a deal to be the 60th vote(he's already voted for a lot of what's in the Senate bill). Brown probably does kill cap & trade(thank bob), but he's going to be under great pressure to at least vote for cloture on Dem bills.

[RedskinsDave]

There is no way he makes a deal to be the 60th vote. He would be hanged in the street.

[akhhorus]

There is no way he makes a deal to be the 60th vote. He would be hanged in the street.

He's voted for the individual mandate and public option in Mass, supports RomneyCare(which is just a single state version of a lot of the Senate bill) and said today on FoxNews that the government should provide insurance to people who can't afford it. That puts on him on the left of the blue dogs in the Senate. He would get pilloried by the movement conservatives, but he's between a rock and a hard place being a republican senator from Massachusetts. The RNC can't help him win in 2012, but being purple might.

[Ibleedburgundy]

Ha ha ha, even when you guys suck its because you're better than the GOP.

Make up your mind. Either he and the GOP ran roughshod or they didn't. Don't act like the dems are above using reconciliation. They shoved the current bills down our throats and would continue to do so had Taxachusetts not put the brakes on it.

The party of Larry Craig sure does talk about throat stuffing a lot. :)

[shally]

The party of Larry Craig sure does talk about throat stuffing a lot. :)

better than the possibility of turning the other cheek..lol...:moon1:

[RedskinsDave]

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/c_01262010_520.gif

[RedskinsDave]

I haven't watched or read the whole thing yet but epic failure on Obama for his comment about foreign companies bank rolling campaigns. I love that Alito publicly disagreed. The ruling specifically denies foreign companies.

[Keino]

I haven't watched or read the whole thing yet but epic failure on Obama for his comment about foreign companies bank rolling campaigns. I love that Alito publicly disagreed. The ruling specifically denies foreign companies.

I think the SOTU deserves its own thread.

Honestly, limiting discussion of this administration to the Change thread seems a bit silly. Why have one Huge thread for the next 7 (I hope) or 3 years?

[BostonSkins]

"Change" takes on on the chin today in the Senate as not only is the debt limit bumped up by ~2 Trillion but Bernanke is confirmed for a second term.

This is not going to end well for most of us.

[RedskinsDave]

I think the SOTU deserves its own thread.

Honestly, limiting discussion of this administration to the Change thread seems a bit silly. Why have one Huge thread for the next 7 (I hope) or 3 years?

Once things change then we can close it. I wouldn't hold my breath even if I were a free diver.

[Keino]

Once things change then we can close it. I wouldn't hold my breath even if I were a free diver.

Again, this makes no sense. All things Obama Admin on one thread? (and I can easily point to one change...a POTUS who is accoutable for his crap, a refreshing change from the previous 8 years)

Im not saying close it, I am saying lets get the specific discussions their own threads. There is no reason to discuss the SOTU in this thread and people who have long since stop paying attention to this thread can actually read and discuss current topics.

Can you imagine if we took what Bush campaigned on in 2000, named a thread "Uniter not Divider" and then proceeded to talk all things Bush for two terms? It would have been as stupid as what we are doing now in this thread.

[RedskinsDave]

Don't worry, people don't seem to have the same passion for politics when they can't bash Bush. This place is silent as a church mouse until I started a thread slapping Palin around.

[RedskinsDave]

Almost forgot....accountable.....lol. I've never seen a politician say "the last 8 years" more often. It's almost as if he ran for the job not knowing it.

[Keino]

Don't worry, people don't seem to have the same passion for politics when they can't bash Bush. This place is silent as a church mouse until I started a thread slapping Palin around.

In my opinion, I think part of it is because it has all been on one thread.

That and we were in-season.

[RedskinsDave]

Well its been a few months more of hope and change and I'd have to say your boy ain't exactly lighting up the legacy lamp there people. It really is amazing how things are covered in the press and how frighteningly silent this place is when it's a dem who is crapping the bed.

I heard as just an aside on the Respect Mah Authoritah or Retire story that we have had our worst month ever in Afghanistan. Nothing to see here. The economy is still in the dump. Unemployment is still around ten percent. The bail outs helped the companies bailed out and no one else. The stimulus didn't stimulate. The oil spill and the subsequent management of the clean up have been unmitigated disasters. North Korea and Iran are mocking everyone since our emperor has no clothes.

I just think it was due time someone gave ole Barry the atta boy he deserves for actually taking a bad situation and making it worse all around. I didn't think it could be done but dogonnit they've done it.

[tuckahoeskin]

Well its been a few months more of hope and change and I'd have to say your boy ain't exactly lighting up the legacy lamp there people. It really is amazing how things are covered in the press and how frighteningly silent this place is when it's a dem who is crapping the bed.

I heard as just an aside on the Respect Mah Authoritah or Retire story that we have had our worst month ever in Afghanistan. Nothing to see here. The economy is still in the dump. Unemployment is still around ten percent. The bail outs helped the companies bailed out and no one else. The stimulus didn't stimulate. The oil spill and the subsequent management of the clean up have been unmitigated disasters. North Korea and Iran are mocking everyone since our emperor has no clothes.

I just think it was due time someone gave ole Barry the atta boy he deserves for actually taking a bad situation and making it worse all around. I didn't think it could be done but dogonnit they've done it.

It's all Bush and Cheney, dontchaknow?

I was never a fan, imagine that, but watching the inauguration I said to myself that this guy is in over his head. He is. He hasn't a clue. This is what you get when you hire someone who has never run anything in his life. He doesn't know how to run organizations nor how to manage people. Professors teach because they seldom succeed in "doing" in the real world. He's better off in a think tank job on Soros' dime where his impact is minimalized.

It's not a race thing, never has been. The problem is his worldview and his opinion of our country. He sees the U.S. as fundamentally flawed and the prime culprit for wrong in the world. Not a good quality for a U.S. President -- example Jimmy Carter.

[akhhorus]

The problem is his worldview and his opinion of our country. He sees the U.S. as fundamentally flawed and the prime culprit for wrong in the world. Not a good quality for a U.S. President -- example Jimmy Carter.

There's a lot of valid criticisms of Obama and his policies, but what exactly is your basis for this accusation?

[BurgundyNGold]

It's all Bush and Cheney, dontchaknow?

I was never a fan, imagine that, but watching the inauguration I said to myself that this guy is in over his head. He is. He hasn't a clue. This is what you get when you hire someone who has never run anything in his life. He doesn't know how to run organizations nor how to manage people. Professors teach because they seldom succeed in "doing" in the real world. He's better off in a think tank job on Soros' dime where his impact is minimalized.

It's not a race thing, never has been. The problem is his worldview and his opinion of our country. He sees the U.S. as fundamentally flawed and the prime culprit for wrong in the world. Not a good quality for a U.S. President -- example Jimmy Carter.
If you look at the facts on the ground, Obama is running the country more like Clinton than Carter. In many ways, he's more aggressive in fighting the war in Afghanistan and going after AQ in Pakistan that W ever was.

[BurgundyNGold]

Well its been a few months more of hope and change and I'd have to say your boy ain't exactly lighting up the legacy lamp there people. It really is amazing how things are covered in the press and how frighteningly silent this place is when it's a dem who is crapping the bed.

I heard as just an aside on the Respect Mah Authoritah or Retire story that we have had our worst month ever in Afghanistan. Nothing to see here. The economy is still in the dump. Unemployment is still around ten percent. The bail outs helped the companies bailed out and no one else. The stimulus didn't stimulate. The oil spill and the subsequent management of the clean up have been unmitigated disasters. North Korea and Iran are mocking everyone since our emperor has no clothes.

I just think it was due time someone gave ole Barry the atta boy he deserves for actually taking a bad situation and making it worse all around. I didn't think it could be done but dogonnit they've done it.
A couple of things on that. First, as a commander, you cannot tolerate even so much as the appearance of insolence and insubordination and that's exactly what McChrystal did. If I were president, I would have done a whole helluvalot more to the guy, including UCMJ action. Second, when you're in the middle of a large ground offense -- the largest since the war began -- you're going to get casualties. If we didn't have the offensive, the arguments would be that he's letting Afghanistan go to hell in a handbasket.

That said, I am not impressed with his efforts on Iran. Allowing China and Russia to drag their feet and water down international pressure is going to prove to be a disaster. And as for North Korea, once again, they're letting China skirt their responsibility of making and feeding the monster.

I do, however, like his finance and regulatory reform efforts. Regardless what the GOP and the Doddites would like everyone to believe, the fox cannot reliably mind the hen house.

[Keino]

If you look at the facts on the ground, Obama is running the country more like Clinton than Carter. In many ways, he's more aggressive in fighting the war in Afghanistan and going after AQ in Pakistan that W ever was.

At the same time he hasn't really ushered in any substantial "change" which was the key campaign slogan. That said, I wasn't one that thought "Change" in the culture of Washington was attainable in two years....or even eight years.

There are some things I am not fond of thus far, such as trying to tackle a comprehensive health care package with so many other issues facing the nation, but overall, I think he is doing a pretty decent job, all things considered. I think without a doubt he has exceeded his predecessor 2 years in, in terms of job performance.

[tuckahoeskin]

There's a lot of valid criticisms of Obama and his policies, but what exactly is your basis for this accusation?

That comment was based on his comments and speeches during his apology tour through the Middle East along with his speech in Berlin on the campaign trail as well as his Nobel speech. His tendency is to blame America first and in no self-effacing manner. He apologizes for past "transgressions" at the expense of his predecessors and country in a naked attempt to elevate himself. Despicable.

In addition, he has made comments that reflect a disdain for our free market ideals and his nod towards a European style of socialism. His comments about redistributing wealth to "Joe the Plumer" are one instance. I don't believe Obama loves America as we know it. I think he wants to change it to reflect an image that would delight leftists, socialists, and communists throughout Europe and the rest of the world.


Tell me your heroes and you tell me who you are. Obama chose to hang out with socialists and communists -- Frank Marshall Davis, Jeremiah Wright, Bernadine Dorhn, and Bill Ayers. It should come as no surprise that his vision of America is askew.

[tuckahoeskin]

If you look at the facts on the ground, Obama is running the country more like Clinton than Carter. In many ways, he's more aggressive in fighting the war in Afghanistan and going after AQ in Pakistan that W ever was.

To be fair to W, he had to manage the bigger conflict in Iraq while managing a lesser one on Afghanistan. With Iraq all but settled, the military is free to focus on Afghanistan. A cicumstance that benefits Obama.

BnG, as a friend, please don't make me defend W too much. :Peace:

[BurgundyNGold]

At the same time he hasn't really ushered in any substantial "change" which was the key campaign slogan. That said, I wasn't one that thought "Change" in the culture of Washington was attainable in two years....or even eight years.
Agreed. I'm still seeing plenty of lobbyists down here on K street. Plenty of them. They're like cockroaches lol. Nothing will change until we take back the government from these... people.

There are some things I am not fond of thus far, such as trying to tackle a comprehensive health care package with so many other issues facing the nation, but overall, I think he is doing a pretty decent job, all things considered. I think without a doubt he has exceeded his predecessor 2 years in, in terms of job performance.
Agreed on the health care, but that was one of the 3 main goals he had. That constitutes a bit of "change", although I don't see how the changes are helping that many people when many, many more wil be paying for it.

As for doing better than his predecessor, well, that's like trying to high jump over a bar buried 2 feet deep lol.

[Keino]

To be fair to W, he had to manage the bigger conflict in Iraq while managing a lesser one on Afghanistan. With Iraq all but settled, the military is free to focus on Afghanistan. A cicumstance that benefits Obama.

BnG, as a friend, please don't make me defend W too much. :Peace:

This is inaccurate. He created the conflict in Iraq thereby taking resources away from the important and meaningful action in Afghanistan. That he turned Afghanistan into the lesser conflict when it should have been the only conflict is precisely one of the many problems with his presidency.

[BurgundyNGold]

To be fair to W, he had to manage the bigger conflict in Iraq while managing a lesser one on Afghanistan. With Iraq all but settled, the military is free to focus on Afghanistan. A cicumstance that benefits Obama.
That's not exactly a resume point. He let the real war (Afghanistan) flounder as he focused his efforts on a war of his own doing (Iraq). That's like putting 200 pounds of manure in a 10 pound sack and then being surprised when you can't lift it lol. If we didn't go into Iraq, Obama likely wouldn't have to deal with active military operations in Afghanistan and the US treasury would have to pay back $1T or so less to China for the privilege of doing it.

BnG, as a friend, please don't make me defend W too much. :Peace:
LOL. With all due respect, defending W is like defending smallpox.

[Fathead]

Keino please don't quote the ignored. lol



I'm sorry, I haven't seen much change. With a stacked house and senate, only the healthcare bill has actually been a major accomplishment (and it isn't that great).

[tuckahoeskin]

This is inaccurate. He created the conflict in Iraq thereby taking resources away from the important and meaningful action in Afghanistan. That he turned Afghanistan into the lesser conflict when it should have been the only conflict is precisely one of the many problems with his presidency.

If Iraq continues to trend towards a self-sufficient democracy, don't you think that changes the dynamic in the Mid East? When their citizens see the freedoms enjoyed by the Iraqis, the rulers in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Jordan, and Syria could no longer point to America as the reason their people are held down.

[tuckahoeskin]

LOL. With all due respect, defending W is like defending smallpox.

:)

I find it funny that there are still people who want to defend Obama. Most of the people I find who are in that group are in the crowd here. He's not all that popular folks, and for good reason.

[BurgundyNGold]

If Iraq continues to trend towards a self-sufficient democracy, don't you think that changes the dynamic in the Mid East? When their citizens see the freedoms enjoyed by the Iraqis, the rulers in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Jordan, and Syria could no longer point to America as the reason their people are held down.
This is an intangible that will not be able to be measured in the span of decades. And even then, it will be in hindsight. Since we're evaluating W today and Obama today (after just 2 years in office) we have to go with the realities of today. The reality is that Iran and Syria have HUGE influence in Iraq who, not shockingly, cannot even form a government after an election.

[Keino]

Tell me your heroes and you tell me who you are. Obama chose to hang out with socialists and communists -- Frank Marshall Davis, Jeremiah Wright, Bernadine Dorhn, and Bill Ayers. It should come as no surprise that his vision of America is askew.

Well good, you will be happy to know that Obama's has said his heroes are Martin Luther King, Jr., Mahatma Ghandi and Cesar Chavez.

Seem like admirable heroes to me. Of course, the current Party of No aka the GOP would say that all of these guys who were about Social Justice were socialists.

Edit: not fair of me to lay that at the feet of the GOP when it is more of a Fox news thing.

[CNYSkinFan]

If Iraq continues to trend towards a self-sufficient democracy, don't you think that changes the dynamic in the Mid East? When their citizens see the freedoms enjoyed by the Iraqis, the rulers in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Jordan, and Syria could no longer point to America as the reason their people are held down.
And if dancing unicorns farted bubbles we'd all be much happier too.

The overriding dynamic of the middle east is poverty and oligarchydue to world demand for its only resource Oil, which allows power to rest in a few people's hands and not the people itself. And Iraw is marginally better now then it was before but after how many thousands of lives lost and trillions of dollars spent/ And the fact is one bad election could send it all spinning out of control again.

No one can really defend Iraq with a straight face.

[Keino]

If Iraq continues to trend towards a self-sufficient democracy, don't you think that changes the dynamic in the Mid East? When their citizens see the freedoms enjoyed by the Iraqis, the rulers in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Jordan, and Syria could no longer point to America as the reason their people are held down.

All of which has nothing to do with your original comment or my comment in response. W and his henchmen created the Iraq conflict without any provocation. It was a country that was irrelevant in the geo-political landscape of the middle east due to the effective policy of containment with respect to Saddam Hussein.

[Fathead]

Keino, BnG, CNY, you all suck. lol


I can't believe anyone thinks Iraq is some pillar of self-sufficiency.

[BurgundyNGold]

:)

I find it funny that there are still people who want to defend Obama. Most of the people I find who are in that group are in the crowd here. He's not all that popular folks, and for good reason.
He's still holding steady around 48%. Not great, but not bad. He'll probably lose some seats in Congress (as is almost always the trend for a first term president during midterms) but I'd be surprised if he doesn't get reelected.

[tuckahoeskin]

Keino, BnG, CNY, you all suck. lol


I can't believe anyone thinks Iraq is some pillar of self-sufficiency.

"continues a trend toward self-sufficiency..." Of course, accurate quotes don't matter to you.

[BurgundyNGold]

Well good, you will be happy to know that Obama's has said his heroes are Martin Luther King, Jr., Mahatma Ghandi and Cesar Chavez.

Seem like admirable heroes to me. Of course, the current Party of No aka the GOP would say that all of these guys who were about Social Justice were socialists.
I am my own hero, b*tches. lol

[tuckahoeskin]

He's still holding steady around 48%. Not great, but not bad. He'll probably lose some seats in Congress (as is almost always the trend for a first term president during midterms) but I'd be surprised if he doesn't get reelected.

Start getting used to the idea.

[akhhorus]

That comment was based on his comments and speeches during his apology tour through the Middle East along with his speech in Berlin on the campaign trail as well as his Nobel speech. His tendency is to blame America first and in no self-effacing manner. He apologizes for past "transgressions" at the expense of his predecessors and country in a naked attempt to elevate himself. Despicable.


What apologies in the mid east tour?

As for your other point here:
His nobel speech, here's the text:
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2009/obama-lecture_en.html

The only points I could find that remotely seem like even the mildest criticism of the US:
One of these wars is winding down. The other is a conflict that America did not seek; one in which we are joined by 42 other countries – including Norway – in an effort to defend ourselves and all nations from further attacks

I raise this point, I begin with this point because in many countries there is a deep ambivalence about military action today, no matter what the cause. And at times, this is joined by a reflexive suspicion of America, the world's sole military superpower.

But in the next paragraph he says this:
The United States of America has helped underwrite global security for more than six decades with the blood of our citizens and the strength of our arms. The service and sacrifice of our men and women in uniform has promoted peace and prosperity from Germany to Korea, and enabled democracy to take hold in places like the Balkans. We have borne this burden not because we seek to impose our will. We have done so out of enlightened self-interest – because we seek a better future for our children and grandchildren, and we believe that their lives will be better if others' children and grandchildren can live in freedom and prosperity.

within America, there has long been a tension between those who describe themselves as realists or idealists – a tension that suggests a stark choice between the narrow pursuit of interests or an endless campaign to impose our values around the world.

Thats it. I'f I'm missing where he "apologized" for anything, feel free to show it.

His Berlin speech:
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/24/obama.words/

The only thing that remotely could be misconstrued as an "apology" is this:

In Europe, the view that America is part of what has gone wrong in our world, rather than a force to help make it right, has become all too common. In America, there are voices that deride and deny the importance of Europe's role in our security and our future. Both views miss the truth - that Europeans today are bearing new burdens and taking more responsibility in critical parts of the world; and that just as American bases built in the last century still help to defend the security of this continent, so does our country still sacrifice greatly for freedom around the globe.

Yes, there have been differences between America and Europe. No doubt, there will be differences in the future. But the burdens of global citizenship continue to bind us together. A change of leadership in Washington will not lift this burden. In this new century, Americans and Europeans alike will be required to do more - not less. Partnership and cooperation among nations is not a choice; it is the one way, the only way, to protect our common security and advance our common humanity.

But thats not an apology for anything.


In addition, he has made comments that reflect a disdain for our free market ideals and his nod towards a European style of socialism. His comments about redistributing wealth to "Joe the Plumer" are one instance. I don't believe Obama loves America as we know it. I think he wants to change it to reflect an image that would delight leftists, socialists, and communists throughout Europe and the rest of the world.

So, he made comments you think are speaking to setting up "socialism"(even though you don't seem to know what that actually means), but hasn't taken any steps towards fulfilling that.

Tell me your heroes and you tell me who you are. Obama chose to hang out with socialists and communists -- Frank Marshall Davis, Jeremiah Wright, Bernadine Dorhn, and Bill Ayers. It should come as no surprise that his vision of America is askew.

Davis was a friend of Obama's grandfather(and Obama didn't think much of him, that he was an ultra idealist who was living in a time warp). Rev Wright is a black nationalist(but there's no proof that Obama has done anything to fulfill his views on society) and he barely knew Ayers/Dorhn.

[tuckahoeskin]

Well good, you will be happy to know that Obama's has said his heroes are Martin Luther King, Jr., Mahatma Ghandi and Cesar Chavez.

Seem like admirable heroes to me. Of course, the current Party of No aka the GOP would say that all of these guys who were about Social Justice were socialists.

And those he chose to surround himself with mean nothing to you? They don't give a window to his true beliefs? Would you defend those beliefs?

[akhhorus]

He's still holding steady around 48%. Not great, but not bad. He'll probably lose some seats in Congress (as is almost always the trend for a first term president during midterms) but I'd be surprised if he doesn't get reelected.

Its hard to knock off a sitting elected Pres. About 84% of them get re-elected(if you discount that Grover Cleveland/Ben Harrison mess in the late 19th century where Cleveland beat Harrison twice while Harrison beat Cleveland in between Cleveland's terms). You need to win the middle decisively and in 2 of the last 4 incumbent defeats, the incumbent lost votes due to a 3rd candidate on their side of the ideological divide(TR siphoning votes from Taft, Perot in 92).

[akhhorus]

And those he chose to surround himself with mean nothing to you? They don't give a window to his true beliefs? Would you defend those beliefs?

The only one he spent any significant amount of time around was Wright, but there's absolutely zero proof that his views are Obama's.

[RedskinsDave]

I am my own hero, b*tches. lol

That's what he really wants to say.

[RedskinsDave]

The only one he spent any significant amount of time around was Wright, but there's absolutely zero proof that his views are Obama's.

Yet if anyone else was surrounded by such a group they would have been politically beheaded long before they got to any presidential race. This clown was almost able to use them in his FAVOR.

[Keino]

Keino, BnG, CNY, you all suck. lol


I can't believe anyone thinks Iraq is some pillar of self-sufficiency.

Yea, we are holding guns to your head and making you read our posts. LOL

[Fathead]

Yea, we are holding guns to your head and making you read our posts. LOL

Just don't quote the ignored! Its much more fun trying to figure out what you are replying to!


;)

[akhhorus]

Yet if anyone else was surrounded by such a group they would have been politically beheaded long before they got to any presidential race. This clown was almost able to use them in his FAVOR.

There's has to be more than just sitting near someone to politically behead someone. Obama's a liberal, but there's absolutely zero evidence in his political career prior to assuming the presidency that he was anywhere near Wright's Black nationalism. And the only connections between Obama and Ayers/Dorhn appear to be a couple political events held in homes in Hyde Park and an Annenberg board that they both sat on.

[tuckahoeskin]

Obama Is A 'One-Term President': Investment Pro

http://www.cnbc.com/id/37893478






:)

[akhhorus]

Obama Is A 'One-Term President': Investment Pro

http://www.cnbc.com/id/37893478

:)

Why bother continuing the discussions you've been a part of when you can predictably just post a link without any discussion about anything. I think in the dictionary under "confirmation bias" there should be a picture of you lol.

[tuckahoeskin]

Why bother continuing the discussions you've been a part of when you can predictably just post a link without any discussion about anything. I think in the dictionary under "confirmation bias" there should be a picture of you lol.

:moon2:

Post a link and you don't like it. Make an argument and you don't like it. I could give a shux about your opinion. "Bill Buckley Republican" my ass. :moon2:

[akhhorus]

:moon2:

Post a link and you don't like it. Make an argument and you don't like it. I could give a shux about your opinion. "Bill Buckley Republican" my ass. :moon2:

This has nothing to do with my opinion(and if you didn't care about my opinion, you wouldn't keep responding). You made a statement, I asked you to explain your statement, you did, I retorted and your response to me(and several others who have engaged you in discussion) is to just post a link with absolutely no discussion about your new link and to ignore any previous discussions.

Now, as usual, you're lashing out when anyone dares to question you. I'm very sorry that you have no actual political opinions of your own besides what you read/hear on Beck's show or from Bill Kristol, but if you're unable to actually discuss issues outside of being a pissy little child whenever people just don't totally agree with you or thank you for just parroting what you read, then a discussion board isn't for you.

And for the record: you're not a republican. You're a lemming. If Beck told you to gay marriage was mandatory, you'd fly to massachusetts and get married to some guy named Steve that evening. If Rich Lowry told you that Marx isn't that bad, you'd be at borders buying every single Marx work they had and pretending that you read them. You don't understand any political issues(or what real conservatism is), you just spit back what you're told to believe which leads to your little temper tantrums whenever you're questioned since you can't actually do any thinking for your own.

[tuckahoeskin]

This has nothing to do with my opinion(and if you didn't care about my opinion, you wouldn't keep responding). You made a statement, I asked you to explain your statement, you did, I retorted and your response to me(and several others who have engaged you in discussion) is to just post a link with absolutely no discussion about your new link and to ignore any previous discussions.

Now, as usual, you're lashing out when anyone dares to question you. I'm very sorry that you have no actual political opinions of your own besides what you read/hear on Beck's show or from Bill Kristol, but if you're unable to actually discuss issues outside of being a pissy little child whenever people just don't totally agree with you or thank you for just parroting what you read, then a discussion board isn't for you.

And for the record: you're not a republican. You're a lemming. If Beck told you to gay marriage was mandatory, you'd fly to massachusetts and get married to some guy named Steve that evening. If Rich Lowry told you that Marx isn't that bad, you'd be at borders buying every single Marx work they had and pretending that you read them. You don't understand any political issues(or what real conservatism is), you just spit back what you're told to believe which leads to your little temper tantrums whenever you're questioned since you can't actually do any thinking for your own.

Hardly. I've been a Republican since Reagan. The first in my family as a matter of fact, and I feel no need to defend that fact to you.

You claim to be a "Bill Buckley Republican" yet you defend Socialized Medicine. Get real. You and the other two stooges constantly defend leftists points on here yet you (personally) claim to be a Republican. Seriously? Ridiculous.

Once again we have a thread where you are having a running spat with another member. We see it over and over again. What's the constant? You. Get off your high horse. You must be a real peach of a person to be around. Nice work Cartman.

[akhhorus]

Hardly. I've been a Republican since Reagan. The first in my family as a matter of fact, and I feel no need to defend that fact to you.

You might call yourself one, but you're a lemming. Whatever you're told to believe, you believe. If Beck told you to support Obama, you would.

You claim to be a "Bill Buckley Republican" yet you defend Socialized Medicine. Get real. You and the other two stooges constantly defend leftists points on here yet you (personally) claim to be a Republican. Seriously? Ridiculous.

So, any republican who's defending medicare(which is far more socialized medicine than anything that's been proposed) is a fake republican? That includes....every single republican in the last 40 years except you apparently. And debating with you over some conspiracy theory or smear you're trying to push isn't using leftist talking points. Its trying to get to the facts of the matter. I'm still waiting for you to point out where Obama has been "apologizing." I suppose this will join the ever expanding list of assertions/claims you've made, but then are unable to produce any proof after someone asks you to and you predictable revert into lashing out, name calling and generally acting like a jerk to try and change the subject.

Once again we have a thread where you are having a running spat with another member. We see it over and over again. What's the constant? You. Get off your high horse. You must be a real peach of a person to be around. Nice work Cartman.

Another straw man trying to make me the issue to try and tap dance. You're the one who keeps lashing out at members(and getting warned for it) here. If you don't like it when someone asks you to explain your crap, tough. I'll continue to do it whether you like it or not.

And if you don't like what I post, you have 3 options:
1-Leave
2-Ignore list me
3-Do nothing.

I frankly don't care which one you choose. I suggest you email Beck to see which he would do since you can't form any opinions on your own.

[CNYSkinFan]

Hardly. I've been a Republican since Reagan. The first in my family as a matter of fact, and I feel no need to defend that fact to you.

You claim to be a "Bill Buckley Republican" yet you defend Socialized Medicine. Get real. You and the other two stooges constantly defend leftists points on here yet you (personally) claim to be a Republican. Seriously? Ridiculous.

Once again we have a thread where you are having a running spat with another member. We see it over and over again. What's the constant? You. Get off your high horse. You must be a real peach of a person to be around. Nice work Cartman.
Since you were a Republican since Reagan, what was Reagan's approval rate at this point in his Presidency?

[Ibleedburgundy]

Since you were a Republican since Reagan, what was Reagan's approval rate at this point in his Presidency?

Here, I'll give the guy some help. Click "compare Presidents" and then click on Reagan's picture. Never try and catch a falling safe, eh?

http://www.gallup.com/poll/124922/Presidential-Job-Approval-Center.aspx

[Fathead]

lol

[Keino]

Here, I'll give the guy some help. Click "compare Presidents" and then click on Reagan's picture. Never try and catch a falling safe, eh?

http://www.gallup.com/poll/124922/Presidential-Job-Approval-Center.aspx

Interesting slide-tool.

[BurgundyNGold]

Obama Is A 'One-Term President': Investment Pro

http://www.cnbc.com/id/37893478


:)
Only if there is another financial meltdown or Iran goes nuclear.

[BurgundyNGold]

Here, I'll give the guy some help. Click "compare Presidents" and then click on Reagan's picture. Never try and catch a falling safe, eh?

http://www.gallup.com/poll/124922/Presidential-Job-Approval-Center.aspx
Cue the attack on the polling data in 3... 2... 1...

[Fathead]

Cue the attack on the polling data in 3... 2... 1...

Nah, he'll just start calling the people here stooges.

[BurgundyNGold]

Interesting slide-tool.
Especially the AA stat lol. 90%? It's hard to get 90% of people to agree on anything. If I asked a group of any 200 people if I could set them on fire, there would be 20% who said yes out of party loyalty, 10% that were undecided and 10% that thought "fire" was a point on a map near Brazil lol.

[RedskinsDave]

Especially the AA stat lol. 90%? It's hard to get 90% of people to agree on anything. If I asked a group of any 200 people if I could set them on fire, there would be 20% who said yes out of party loyalty, 10% that were undecided and 10% that thought "fire" was a point on a map near Brazil lol.

Group think in full effect.

[justinskins]

In the words of Dick Cheney, "Reagan proved deficits don't matter."

[CNYSkinFan]

More Obama/reagan comparisons to blow taylor's mind

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/barack-obama-ronald-reagan-approval-ratings-economy-link/story?id=11182543&nwltr=politics_featureHed

[shally]

In the words of Dick Cheney, "Reagan proved deficits don't matter."

Cheney is proving you dont need a working heart to remain alive.. i hear he is on a list for transplants but first they need to find a doctor who has experience using a wooden stake to make the incision...lol

[akhhorus]

More Obama/reagan comparisons to blow taylor's mind

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/barack-obama-ronald-reagan-approval-ratings-economy-link/story?id=11182543&nwltr=politics_featureHed

Taylor actually can't read this post lol