PDA

View Full Version : Barack Hussein Obama foreign policy disaster megathread



Darth Executor
03-05-2014, 10:34 AM
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bh5gzeJIgAEt9KN.jpg

"Obama says Putin move into Ukraine not a sign of Russian strength."


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QS2a44F5TgM

“A few months ago when you were asked what’s the biggest geopolitical threat facing America, you said Russia…the 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because the Cold War’s been over for 20 years.”

http://i.imgur.com/BT84X.png

John Kerry video can be found here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meiyldvHhqA)since for some reason I can't embed more than one video in a post:

“…but not Mitt Romney. He’s even blurted out the preposterous notion that Russia is our ‘number one geopolitical foe.’ Folks: Sarah Palin said she could see Russia from Alaska; Mitt Romney talks like he’s only seen Russia by watching Rocky IV.”

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BhnFrrEIQAAWVYs.jpg

John Kerry now finds out that Obama is not just grossly incompetent, but, apparently, going completely insane:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/03/05/report-john-kerry-confidantes-say-obama-sabotaged-mideast-peace-talks-with-harsh-interview/


An Israeli newspaper is reporting that two officials close to U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry are quietly accusing President Barack Obama of sabotaging Middle East peace efforts after giving an interview in which he sharply criticized Israeli government policy.

The unnamed officials also claim that Kerry was never given a heads-up that the president had planned an interview with reporter Jeffrey Goldberg of Bloomberg View – just days before Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s arrival in Washington — on the subject of the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian peace process.

Eli Bardenstein, diplomatic correspondent for the Israeli newspaper Maariv, reported Wednesday that “those close to Secretary of State John Kerry claim in private conversations that President Barack Obama sabotaged Kerry’s efforts to reach agreements over the framework agreement, in the aggressive interview he gave” Goldberg.

“Maariv has learned that the White House hid even from Kerry the very existence of the interview, in a way that is unacceptable in the U.S. capital,” the Israeli reporter added.

I'm starting to consider the serious possibility that the globalist egalitardians that guide the march of Progress have actually inhaled their own vast coke reserves.

Zymologist
03-05-2014, 10:46 AM
What I'm about to post is probably going to be considered very disrespectful, but what the heck. We are in Civics, after all. :wink:

379

Not sure if attachments are working yet, so here's the link:

http://townhall.com/political-cartoons/2014/03/03/116675

hamster
03-05-2014, 10:51 AM
Ground floor

Bill the Cat
03-05-2014, 10:52 AM
What I'm about to post is probably going to be considered very disrespectful, but what the heck. We are in Civics, after all. :wink:

379

Not sure if attachments are working yet, so here's the link:

http://townhall.com/political-cartoons/2014/03/03/116675

:rofl: Lil Lord Fauntler-Obama!! :lmbo:

Cow Poke
03-05-2014, 11:59 AM
I bet Jimmy Carter thanks God every night for Obama.

phank
03-05-2014, 12:05 PM
Poe's law strikes again.

Bill the Cat
03-05-2014, 12:21 PM
Poe's law strikes again.

:huh: Where? There was no extremist position posted by Darth in the OP. He posted Obumbles' insult about Romney saying Russia was our biggest threat, and that threat has clearly come to pass. Those are facts, not an extremist position. Therefore, Poe's Law is absent.

Cerebrum123
03-05-2014, 12:34 PM
What I'm about to post is probably going to be considered very disrespectful, but what the heck. We are in Civics, after all. :wink:

379

Not sure if attachments are working yet, so here's the link:

http://townhall.com/political-cartoons/2014/03/03/116675

:lmbo:

phank
03-05-2014, 01:08 PM
:huh: Where? There was no extremist position posted by Darth in the OP. He posted Obumbles' insult about Romney saying Russia was our biggest threat, and that threat has clearly come to pass. Those are facts, not an extremist position. Therefore, Poe's Law is absent.

I didn't mention the OP. I was referring to the level of "political analysis" that cannot rise above calling the President stupid names.

Zymologist
03-05-2014, 01:17 PM
I didn't mention the OP. I was referring to the level of "political analysis" that cannot rise above calling the President stupid names.

For example...?

Darth Executor
03-05-2014, 01:18 PM
I didn't mention the OP. I was referring to the level of "political analysis" that cannot rise above calling the President stupid names.

http://nearestdukaan.com/images/dukaan_upload/products/4bc042e86708067271aa865c11830265.jpg

Cow Poke
03-05-2014, 01:20 PM
I didn't mention the OP. I was referring to the level of "political analysis" that cannot rise above calling the President stupid names.

It was me, wasn't it? I called him Obama. :sad:

phank
03-05-2014, 01:31 PM
For example...?

Read the posts by Bill the Cat. Get back to me.

Zymologist
03-05-2014, 01:32 PM
Read the posts by Bill the Cat. Get back to me.

He'd only posted once before your first comment, and I don't even know what "Lil Lord Fauntler-Obama" means. (My ignorance again...) :shrug:

Cow Poke
03-05-2014, 01:33 PM
Read the posts by Bill the Cat. Get back to me.


{ Somebody put one of those triple face-palm pictures here. }

:doh:

Bill the Cat
03-05-2014, 02:07 PM
I didn't mention the OP. I was referring to the level of "political analysis" that cannot rise above calling the President stupid names.

Mine was a comment on what Obama looked like in the political cartton posted by Zym. And the other post had a stupid name for the President as a small part of the post, so again, Poe would not apply in either case. Perhaps you can inappropriately accuse one of us of Godwin's Law next?

HMS_Beagle
03-05-2014, 02:56 PM
He'd only posted once before your first comment, and I don't even know what "Lil Lord Fauntler-Obama" means. (My ignorance again...) :shrug:

Little Lord Fauntleroy was a character in a children's novel set in Victorian England in the 1880's. The character has come to represent the stereotype of any wimpy spoiled rich brat kid. Comparison to LLF as was done in the cartoon is not a complimentary action.

380

Jedidiah
03-05-2014, 04:23 PM
I didn't mention the OP. I was referring to the level of "political analysis" that cannot rise above calling the President stupid names.

With Obama I am not sure calling him stupid names is extreme. In fact it may be complementary.

rogue06
03-05-2014, 04:48 PM
{ Somebody put one of those triple face-palm pictures here. }

:doh:
In triplicate no less


http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20131217081420/cardfight/images/8/8a/Triple_facepalm.png
http://www.ixtreme.net/attachments/open-forum/7596d1384417812-making-probe-help-triple-facepalm.jpg
http://i011.radikal.ru/1104/11/6e8062e32f34.jpg


I'll send you my bill.

JimL
03-05-2014, 05:17 PM
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bh5gzeJIgAEt9KN.jpg

"Obama says Putin move into Ukraine not a sign of Russian strength."


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QS2a44F5TgM

“A few months ago when you were asked what’s the biggest geopolitical threat facing America, you said Russia…the 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because the Cold War’s been over for 20 years.”

http://i.imgur.com/BT84X.png

John Kerry video can be found here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meiyldvHhqA)since for some reason I can't embed more than one video in a post:

“…but not Mitt Romney. He’s even blurted out the preposterous notion that Russia is our ‘number one geopolitical foe.’ Folks: Sarah Palin said she could see Russia from Alaska; Mitt Romney talks like he’s only seen Russia by watching Rocky IV.”

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BhnFrrEIQAAWVYs.jpg

John Kerry now finds out that Obama is not just grossly incompetent, but, apparently, going completely insane:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/03/05/report-john-kerry-confidantes-say-obama-sabotaged-mideast-peace-talks-with-harsh-interview/



I'm starting to consider the serious possibility that the globalist egalitardians that guide the march of Progress have actually inhaled their own vast coke reserves.
When and if Republicans ever put forth their own ideas rather than just criticizing everything the President does then maybe they could be taken seriously. But they don't because they can't. Putin loves you american critics of the President as much as you Republicans seem to love the tyrant Putin.

Cow Poke
03-05-2014, 05:21 PM
When and if Republicans ever put forth their own ideas rather than just criticizing everything the President does then maybe they could be taken seriously. But they don't because they can't. Putin loves you american critics of the President as much as you Republicans seem to love the tyrant Putin.

Do you actually think anybody takes YOU seriously, Jimmy?

Bill the Cat
03-06-2014, 04:56 AM
When and if Republicans ever put forth their own ideas rather than just criticizing everything the President does then maybe they could be taken seriously.

When your car is speeding toward a cliff to sudden doom, isn't it prudent at first to stop the car before you plot the rest of your course?



But they don't because they can't.

:rofl: What's the percentage of stalls the Senate and the POTUS have given to Republican backed legislation from the House?


Putin loves you american critics of the President as much as you Republicans seem to love the tyrant Putin.

We do not love Putin by ANY stretch. He's insane. But it is quite telling that Obama is acting like the bully on the other side of the glass like always, and when the mark steps around the glass and he is challenged, he backs down faster than a mound of snow in an avalanche. We really hate what this idiot has done to our country and our reputation, and we predicted these things would happen when he ran for President the first time. But you libs are quite content to be the joke of the world who no one has any measure of healthy respect.

Zymologist
03-06-2014, 06:51 AM
Little Lord Fauntleroy was a character in a children's novel set in Victorian England in the 1880's. The character has come to represent the stereotype of any wimpy spoiled rich brat kid. Comparison to LLF as was done in the cartoon is not a complimentary action.

380

Ah, so I just wasn't familiar with the name. Thanks.

Zymologist
03-06-2014, 06:54 AM
When and if Republicans ever put forth their own ideas rather than just criticizing everything the President does then maybe they could be taken seriously. But they don't because they can't. Putin loves you american critics of the President as much as you Republicans seem to love the tyrant Putin.

I'm quite sure that DE does not identify as a Republican. Neither, I suspect, do several of the conservatives here. Republican =/= conservative.

Cow Poke
03-06-2014, 06:54 AM
Obama is like the parent who keeps telling the child, "if you do that one more time, I'm going to spank you... I mean it... ok, that's it, this time I REALLY mean it..... " And the child knows by experience he can pretty well get away with anything.

"red line" my eye!

Jedidiah
03-06-2014, 01:36 PM
We do not love Putin by ANY stretch. He's insane. But it is quite telling that Obama is acting like the bully on the other side of the glass like always, and when the mark steps around the glass and he is challenged, he backs down faster than a mound of snow in an avalanche. We really hate what this idiot has done to our country and our reputation, and we predicted these things would happen when he ran for President the first time. But you libs are quite content to be the joke of the world who no one has any measure of healthy respect.

That is a clear description of Obama. He hits those who can not defend themselves and cries when he gets hit back.

JimL
03-06-2014, 06:46 PM
When your car is speeding toward a cliff to sudden doom, isn't it prudent at first to stop the car before you plot the rest of your course?



:rofl: What's the percentage of stalls the Senate and the POTUS have given to Republican backed legislation from the House?



We do not love Putin by ANY stretch. He's insane. But it is quite telling that Obama is acting like the bully on the other side of the glass like always, and when the mark steps around the glass and he is challenged, he backs down faster than a mound of snow in an avalanche. We really hate what this idiot has done to our country and our reputation, and we predicted these things would happen when he ran for President the first time. But you libs are quite content to be the joke of the world who no one has any measure of healthy respect.
What things "happened" Bill? What has Obama done to our country? And again what would you have done differently?

lilpixieofterror
03-06-2014, 06:46 PM
I didn't mention the OP. I was referring to the level of "political analysis" that cannot rise above calling the President stupid names.

Most of what was posted is pretty tame, compared to some other insults that have been leveled at presidents of the past.

lilpixieofterror
03-06-2014, 06:48 PM
What things "happened" Bill? What has Obama done to our country? And again what would you have done differently?

More avoidance Jimmy?

JimL
03-06-2014, 06:57 PM
I'm quite sure that DE does not identify as a Republican. Neither, I suspect, do several of the conservatives here. Republican =/= conservative.
The point remains the same regardless of how you identify. I'm not talking about you, i'm talking about those who represent you. They have no ideas. They criticize the President for political points in the midst of a foriegn crisis, much to the delight of Putin mind you, but do they put forth anything that they would do differently than the President. No they don't because all they know how to do is criticise.

Cow Poke
03-06-2014, 08:45 PM
They criticize the President for political points in the midst of a foriegn crisis,

It's "foreign" crisis, Jimmy -- and his entire administration has been a foreign crisis. Jimmy Carter is probably thanking God every night that Obama is President.


No they don't because all they know how to do is criticise.

It's "criticize", Jimmy, and he brings it on himself.

Paprika
03-06-2014, 08:52 PM
It's "criticize", Jimmy, and he brings it on himself.
No, it's "criticise". You Americans and your "American" English :rant:

Darth Executor
03-06-2014, 09:12 PM
The point remains the same regardless of how you identify. I'm not talking about you, i'm talking about those who represent you. They have no ideas. They criticize the President for political points in the midst of a foriegn crisis, much to the delight of Putin mind you, but do they put forth anything that they would do differently than the President. No they don't because all they know how to do is criticise.

I'm pretty sure that Putin is a lot more delighted by the fact that Obama is a bumbling buffoon. You seem awfully butthurt by the fact that people are posting Obama's own words. It's not my fault he looks like an utter imbecile, it's his fault. I owe your boyfriend nothing other than to point my finger and laugh, both at him and his idiot arrogant supporters. "The 80s called, they want their foreign policy back." How'd that work out for your Jimmy? Oceans receding yet? Every time progressitards trip and fall on their face I will be here, jeering like a hyena.

Cow Poke
03-07-2014, 04:18 AM
No, it's "criticise". You Americans and your "American" English :rant:

I was expecting that from SOMEBODY across the pond, but ... I'm telling Mom!

Cow Poke
03-07-2014, 04:21 AM
I'm pretty sure that Putin is a lot more delighted by the fact that Obama is a bumbling buffoon.

That is all that matters here. That, and the fact that an ever-shrinking minority of people still think the community organizer is doing a better job than the KGB thug. And Jimmy will be right there leading the cheers.

Bill the Cat
03-07-2014, 06:17 AM
They have no ideas.

Name an issue and I will give you the Republican idea. That'll prove that your "no ideas" parroting is pure rubbish.

Cow Poke
03-07-2014, 06:20 AM
Name an issue and I will give you the Republican idea. That'll prove that your "no ideas" parroting is pure rubbish.

He means "no ideas" in the sense that Obama meant "your policy" when he said you can KEEP it. It's only an "idea" or a "policy" if the Obamakins say it is.

Same thing with "the Republicans have never offered an alternative" to Obamacare. Big steaming pile of horsie poo.

rogue06
03-07-2014, 07:49 AM
I was expecting that from SOMEBODY across the pond, but ... I'm telling Mom!
That, to you Brits, would be that he plans on informing his mum.

rogue06
03-07-2014, 07:54 AM
Most of what was posted is pretty tame, compared to some other insults that have been leveled at presidents of the past.

391
Obviously this is utterly false. No other president in our history has taken any flack or been insulted by the opposition. This is a situation unique to Obama. And of course it is all racially motivated since nobody could possibly disagree with his policies.

Cow Poke
03-07-2014, 08:36 AM
That, to you Brits, would be that he plans on informing his mum.

yeah!

Paprika
03-07-2014, 08:56 AM
that, to you brits, would be that he's a :baby:
ftfy.

Cow Poke
03-07-2014, 09:05 AM
Meanwhile, with Obama's attention forced on the Black Sea, just recently, N Korea is firing missiles again (twice in the last week), Russia has announced it will be refueling its bombers in communist-leaning countries, Syria is still in turmoil, Libya was a failed Obama "accomplishment", and, a Russian spy ship, The Viktor Leonov, makes an unannounced visit to a Havana Bay.

Is it time, yet, for Obama to return his Nobel Prize?

robrecht
03-07-2014, 09:43 AM
Should we perhaps send troops into Crimea, invade Russia, keep silent and say nothing? There's no good approach to this.

Recall Bush Junior responding to a question about whether or not Putin was a man Americans can trust: "Yes. ... I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straightforward and trustworthy. ... I was able to get a sense of his soul ... I wouldn't have invited him to my ranch if I didn't trust him."

I suspect Bush knew what he was saying was not true but was putting the best face on the situation. Look at what Bush did in Georgia in 2008.

"We did a lot, but in the end there was not much that you could do," said James F. Jeffrey, Bush's deputy national security advisor.

Quotes taken from Ron Fournier's March 2nd piece in the National Journal. Fournier was the reporter who asked this question of Bush.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/white-house/why-putin-plays-our-presidents-for-fools-20140302

Cow Poke
03-07-2014, 09:49 AM
The current situation is, indeed, very troubling, and I'm amazed that those defending Obama use the Bush example. If Bush handled that so badly, as I've seen some of them complain, why on earth would Obama follow in his footsteps?

It's possible that there is NOT a "good" solution to the current situation, but Obama's foreign policy has been giving a green light to Putin for his entire administration.

It is Obama's disastrous foreign policy that has pretty much signaled that the USA will stand back and do nothing. I still have visions of Hillary taking the "Reset Button" to the Russians to let them know we're gonna play nice.

Darth Executor
03-07-2014, 09:51 AM
Should we perhaps send troops into Crimea, invade Russia, keep silent and say nothing? There's no good approach to this.

Sending troops to Western Ukraine sounds like a very good idea to me. There's no need to invade Russia and Putin's not gonna start a nuclear exchange over Ukraine anymore than we are. Russia has the potential to become a superpower again, just like NAZI Germany did. More importantly, they have no reason not to be one if they can get away with it and plenty of reason to do exactly that. Just like NAZI Germany did...

robrecht
03-07-2014, 09:53 AM
The current situation is, indeed, very troubling, and I'm amazed that those defending Obama use the Bush example. If Bush handled that so badly, as I've seen some of them complain, why on earth would Obama follow in his footsteps?

It's possible that there is NOT a "good" solution to the current situation, but Obama's foreign policy has been giving a green light to Putin for his entire administration.

It is Obama's disastrous foreign policy that has pretty much signaled that the USA will stand back and do nothing. I still have visions of Hillary taking the "Reset Button" to the Russians to let them know we're gonna play nice.
Note that Fournier is not defending Obama, nor am I, but what would you have him do? What would Bush, McCain or Romney have done?

Zymologist
03-07-2014, 09:54 AM
Why is Bush always brought up when the discussion is about Obama's poor leadership? I mean, always? Is there so little ammunition to defend Obama from criticism that his supporters must resort, seemingly without fail, to bringing up his predecessor?

I don't mean this as disrespectful, robrecht, I just see it happen on nearly every issue for which Obama receives criticism.

Darth Executor
03-07-2014, 09:57 AM
Why is Bush always brought up when the discussion is about Obama's poor leadership? I mean, always? Is there so little ammunition to defend Obama from criticism that his supporters must resort, seemingly without fail, to bringing up his predecessor?

I don't even understand how "he's just like Bush" is supposed to be a defense to begin with. The way they talk about it you'd think the Shrub had been a second Alexander the Great or Otto von Bismarck and not a miserable failure.

Cow Poke
03-07-2014, 09:57 AM
Note that Fournier is not defending Obama, nor am I,

Yeah, which is why, in responding to your post, I said "those defending Obama" -- I should have been more clear that I did NOT mean you. My bad.


but what would you have him do? What would Bush, McCain or Romney have done?

Act more like Reagan.

robrecht
03-07-2014, 09:58 AM
Why is Bush always brought up when the discussion is about Obama's poor leadership? I mean, always? Is there so little ammunition to defend Obama from criticism that his supporters must resort, seemingly without fail, to bringing up his predecessor?

I don't mean this as disrespectful, robrecht, I just see it happen on nearly every issue for which Obama receives criticism.See my response above regarding defending Obama. I think the situation in Georgia is indeed comparable. Should we have used military force to oppose Putin in 2008?

Zymologist
03-07-2014, 09:58 AM
I don't even understand how "he's just like Bush" is supposed to be a defense to begin with. The way they talk about it you'd think the Shrub had been a second Alexander the Great or Otto von Bismarck and not a miserable failure.

Yeah, I don't get it either. :shrug:

robrecht
03-07-2014, 10:00 AM
Yeah, which is why, in responding to your post, I said "those defending Obama" -- I should have been more clear that I did NOT mean you. My bad.



Act more like Reagan.
No prob. I didn't think you necessarily meant me, but just wanted to clarify my position. And what do you think Reagan would have done?

robrecht
03-07-2014, 10:04 AM
I don't even understand how "he's just like Bush" is supposed to be a defense to begin with. The way they talk about it you'd think the Shrub had been a second Alexander the Great or Otto von Bismarck and not a miserable failure.We can agree on this.

Darth Executor
03-07-2014, 10:06 AM
We can agree on this.

So you'll stop using it then? :tongue:

robrecht
03-07-2014, 10:08 AM
So you'll stop using it then? :tongue:
I do not use it as a defense.

Cow Poke
03-07-2014, 10:12 AM
No prob. I didn't think you necessarily meant me, but just wanted to clarify my position. And what do you think Reagan would have done?

I don't think we would have gotten into this position in the first place, because Reagan made it very clear that he said what he meant and he meant what he said, and never showed weakness to the enemies or potential enemies of the US. I think Obama constantly communicates weakness and conciliation, foolishly thinking that if we "play nice" our enemies will play nice, as well.

robrecht
03-07-2014, 10:21 AM
I don't think we would have gotten into this position in the first place, because Reagan made it very clear that he said what he meant and he meant what he said, and never showed weakness to the enemies or potential enemies of the US. I think Obama constantly communicates weakness and conciliation, foolishly thinking that if we "play nice" our enemies will play nice, as well.
I agree with the Weinberger doctrine, which I view as an implicit critique of Reagan's lack of clear direction in Beirut.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/10/23/lessons-learned-and-forgotten-from-beirut-marine-barracks-bombing/

lilpixieofterror
03-07-2014, 06:42 PM
391
Obviously this is utterly false. No other president in our history has taken any flack or been insulted by the opposition. This is a situation unique to Obama. And of course it is all racially motivated since nobody could possibly disagree with his policies.

Sounds like something Jimmy would say. Has Rogue Tech invented something that you're testing right now?

BTW if they really want to know, look up the presidential race between Andrew Jackson and John Q. Adams.

rogue06
03-07-2014, 07:11 PM
Is it time, yet, for Obama to return his Nobel Prize?
Did you know that Putin has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize?

JimL
03-07-2014, 07:12 PM
It's "foreign" crisis, Jimmy -- and his entire administration has been a foreign crisis. Jimmy Carter is probably thanking God every night that Obama is President.
And I thought you never listened to the right wing echo chamber CP. :lol:



he brings it on himself.
No he doesn't CP, your party has gone out of its way to criticize him from the first day he took office. Well, any way, i'm sure Putin appreciates your patriotic efforts.:bonk:

JimL
03-07-2014, 07:16 PM
I'm pretty sure that Putin is a lot more delighted by the fact that Obama is a bumbling buffoon. You seem awfully butthurt by the fact that people are posting Obama's own words. It's not my fault he looks like an utter imbecile, it's his fault. I owe your boyfriend nothing other than to point my finger and laugh, both at him and his idiot arrogant supporters. "The 80s called, they want their foreign policy back." How'd that work out for your Jimmy? Oceans receding yet? Every time progressitards trip and fall on their face I will be here, jeering like a hyena.
You're always jeering like a hyena Darth, thats who you are.

rogue06
03-07-2014, 07:17 PM
Should we perhaps send troops into Crimea, invade Russia, keep silent and say nothing? There's no good approach to this.

Recall Bush Junior responding to a question about whether or not Putin was a man Americans can trust: "Yes. ... I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straightforward and trustworthy. ... I was able to get a sense of his soul ... I wouldn't have invited him to my ranch if I didn't trust him."

I suspect Bush knew what he was saying was not true but was putting the best face on the situation. Look at what Bush did in Georgia in 2008.

"We did a lot, but in the end there was not much that you could do," said James F. Jeffrey, Bush's deputy national security advisor.

Quotes taken from Ron Fournier's March 2nd piece in the National Journal. Fournier was the reporter who asked this question of Bush.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/white-house/why-putin-plays-our-presidents-for-fools-20140302
To be fair the invasion of Georgia took place in Bush's final months of office when it was doubtful he could have gotten Congress to agree to anything even if he wanted to do something.

JimL
03-07-2014, 07:19 PM
That is all that matters here. That, and the fact that an ever-shrinking minority of people still think the community organizer is doing a better job than the KGB thug. And Jimmy will be right there leading the cheers.
I guess you'd rather be lead by the KGB thug eh CP. Sounds about right.

JimL
03-07-2014, 07:23 PM
Name an issue and I will give you the Republican idea. That'll prove that your "no ideas" parroting is pure rubbish.
You brought it up Bill, so defend it yourself. What things happened, what has Obama done to the Country?

robrecht
03-07-2014, 07:25 PM
To be fair the invasion of Georgia took place in Bush's final months of office when it was doubtful he could have gotten Congress to agree to anything even if he wanted to do something.But what do you think he should have done? Did you agree with John 'We're all Georgians now' McCain? James Jeffrey's comment still stands, I think.

JimL
03-07-2014, 07:42 PM
391
Obviously this is utterly false. No other president in our history has taken any flack or been insulted by the opposition. This is a situation unique to Obama. And of course it is all racially motivated since nobody could possibly disagree with his policies.
Nobody said its "unique," and nobody said it is "all" racially motivated, but if you guys can't see/admit that you've taken it to a whole other level, well then, you are just incapable of admitting to the truth. Just to paraphrase one of your hero's: "That Chicago marxist, communist educated, communist nurtured, subhuman mongrel who weaseled his way into the Presidency." And this stuff is constant, so take your head out of the sand and listen.

Zymologist
03-07-2014, 07:48 PM
Nobody said its "unique," and nobody said it is "all" racially motivated, but if you guys can't see/admit that you've taken it to a whole other level, well then, you are just incapable of admitting to the truth. Just to paraphrase one of your hero's: "That Chicago marxist, communist educated, communist nurtured, subhuman mongrel who weaseled his way into the Presidency." And this stuff is constant, so take your head out of the sand and listen.

So when you say it's not unique, what you really mean is it is in fact unique? I'm confused.

JimL
03-07-2014, 08:05 PM
Why is Bush always brought up when the discussion is about Obama's poor leadership? I mean, always? Is there so little ammunition to defend Obama from criticism that his supporters must resort, seemingly without fail, to bringing up his predecessor?

I don't mean this as disrespectful, robrecht, I just see it happen on nearly every issue for which Obama receives criticism.
We bring it up because it is obvious that you are acting like hypocrites who are only ranting on an on about Obama because he is Obama. You all love to say, now that Bush is out of office, how you disagreed with a lot of what he did. But where were you then? I didn't hear any of you saying then how it was Bush's weak foreign policies that led to Putins action in Georgia. And btw, you didn't hear Democrats saying that either.

Zymologist
03-07-2014, 08:07 PM
We bring it up because it is obvious that you are acting like hypocrites who are only ranting on an on about Obama because he is Obama. You all love to say, now that Bush is out of office, how you disagreed with a lot of what he did. But where were you then? I didn't hear anyone saying then how it was Bush's weak foreign policies that led to Putins action in Georgia.

Well, I can't speak for anyone else, but I was in high school and quite ignorant of politics. Sometimes I wish I'd stayed that way....

ETA: Not to say that I'm not still pretty ignorant, but at least now I'm working on it. :wink:

Paprika
03-07-2014, 10:07 PM
We do not love Putin by ANY stretch. He's insane.
How is Putin insane?

Paprika
03-07-2014, 10:45 PM
IMO, after the Ukraine opposition broke the EU-brokered deal with Yanukovich, to just about zero condemnation by EU and Western powers, the critique of Russia transgressing the Budapest Memorandum is ironical and hilarious.

Bill the Cat
03-08-2014, 05:07 AM
You brought it up Bill, so defend it yourself. What things happened, what has Obama done to the Country?

I'll name just a few:

1) The "Red Line" with Syria which let genocide to continue unabated
2) The Russian "Reset"
3) The NSA Spy program
4) Benghazi
5) No response to the Arab Spring fallout
6) Allowed Iran's nuclear ambitions to continue with little resistance
7) The hasty retreat in Iraq which has Al Queda regaining strength

And those are just the big ones from a foreign policy perspective. No one respects our military might anymore. Heck, our allies barely even know which direction Obama's "fly by the seat of his pants" foreign policy will go.

Bill the Cat
03-08-2014, 05:12 AM
How is Putin insane?

Look up the attack on Katyr Yurt.

Cow Poke
03-08-2014, 05:23 AM
And I thought you never listened to the right wing echo chamber CP. :lol:

I don't.


No he doesn't CP,

Yes he does.


your party has gone out of its way to criticize him from the first day he took office. Well, any way,

My "party"? I'm an independent,


i'm sure Putin appreciates your patriotic efforts.:bonk:

Jimmy --- you can be a real moron, ya know? :glare:

Cow Poke
03-08-2014, 05:24 AM
I guess you'd rather be lead by the KGB thug eh CP. Sounds about right.

Well, that would sound right to a total goofus, I guess. :shrug:

Paprika
03-08-2014, 05:30 AM
Look up the attack on Katyr Yurt.
Looked it up. Don't see how that constitutes evidence for him being insane. :shrug:

lilpixieofterror
03-08-2014, 06:39 AM
Nobody said its "unique," and nobody said it is "all" racially motivated, but if you guys can't see/admit that you've taken it to a whole other level, well then, you are just incapable of admitting to the truth. Just to paraphrase one of your hero's: "That Chicago marxist, communist educated, communist nurtured, subhuman mongrel who weaseled his way into the Presidency." And this stuff is constant, so take your head out of the sand and listen.

Really Jimmy? Here is something written about Abe Lincoln, during his lifetime:

"The illustrious Honest Old Abe has continued during the last week to make a fool of himself and to mortify and shame the intelligent people of this great nation. His speeches have demonstrated the fact that although originally a Herculean rail splitter and more lately a whimsical story teller and side splitter, he is no more capable of becoming a statesman, nay, even a moderate one, than the braying ass can become a noble lion. People now marvel how it came to pass that Mr. Lincoln should have been selected as the representative man of any party. His weak, wishy-washy, namby-pamby efforts, imbecile in matter, disgusting in manner, have made us the laughing stock of the whole world. The European powers will despise us because we have no better material out of which to make a President. The truth is, Lincoln is only a moderate lawyer and in the larger cities of the Union could pass for no more than a facetious pettifogger. Take him from his vocation and he loses even these small characteristics and indulges in simple twaddle which would disgrace a well bred school boy."
http://www.civilwar.org/hallowed-ground-magazine/unpopular-mr-lincoln.html

Read the entire article and see what was said about him (even by his own party and even staff). Really Jimmy, do you even think or bother to look things up BEFORE you speak?

Bill the Cat
03-08-2014, 10:42 AM
Looked it up. Don't see how that constitutes evidence for him being insane. :shrug:

He ordered it, and then promoted the officer in charge.

Paprika
03-08-2014, 10:45 AM
He ordered it, and then promoted the officer in charge.
Well. unless you're identifying moral depravity with insanity I still don't see how you can reach your conclusion :shrug:

Bill the Cat
03-08-2014, 10:49 AM
Well. unless you're identifying moral depravity with insanity I still don't see how you can reach your conclusion :shrug:

I don't think a sane person can order that type of thing. Extreme moral depravity is insanity IMV.

rogue06
03-08-2014, 10:57 AM
Nobody said its "unique," and nobody said it is "all" racially motivated, but if you guys can't see/admit that you've taken it to a whole other level, well then, you are just incapable of admitting to the truth. Just to paraphrase one of your hero's: "That Chicago marxist, communist educated, communist nurtured, subhuman mongrel who weaseled his way into the Presidency." And this stuff is constant, so take your head out of the sand and listen.
Got to love it that you need to find something a musician said about Obama while erstwhile journalists were calling Bush things like a "despotic ... murderous fascist" (Keith Olberman at MSNBC). And what musicians were saying about Bush, like Natalie Maine of Dixie Chicks, I can't even post in a veiled manner in that it would be a violation of Tweb's rules about obscenities. Other entertainers like Bill Maher speak with pride of the various things they called Bush from "a catastrophe that walks like a man" and "Drinky McDumbass" to, again, things I can't even say in veiled form.

Movies were made that were fantasies about assassinating the president (Bush) and even several years later "Game of Thrones" was sticking his decapitated head on a spike (http://www.thehdroom.com/images/news/10812a.jpg)[1]. Books (http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/books/2004/08/assassination_porn.html) were written about people fantasizing about killing Bush (another book "Assassination Vacation" is a "humorous" travelogue of sites where American presidents -- all and only Republican -- were assassinated). Art exhibits at the reputable Columbia College in Chicago featured images of Bush with a gun pointed to his head (http://www.theipinionsjournal.com/img/251/3728/480/bushGUN.jpg). Video games (“The Night of Bush Capturing; A Virtual Jihadi”) were made with the goal of killing Bush (http://artthreat.net/wp-content/uploads/virtual-jihad.jpg) and again displayed in an art gallery as part of their "Free Speech Exhibition."[2]

Randi Rhodes, a talk show host on the now defunct liberal radio channel Air America, compared the Bush family to the fictitious Corleone family in the “Godfather” movies, and suggested that Bush should be assassinated. “Like Fredo, somebody ought to take him [President Bush] fishing and phuw.” Rhodes then imitated the sound of a gunshot and said, “Works for me.” In “Godfather 2,” Fredo Corleone is murdered at the end of the film on orders from his brother Michael. Rhodes had also said that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld “ought to be tortured.” Imagine if Rush Limbaugh had ever “joked” about Obama being assassinated. Then, less than a year later Rhodes did it again. In a Social Security reform bit on her program, an imaginary retiree from the fictional “American Association of Armed Retired People” says, “A spoiled child is telling us our Social Security isn't safe any more, so he’s going to fix it for us. Well, here’s your answer, you ungrateful whelp” – and then four gunshots ring out.

The left had quite a fascination with assassinating Bush ranging from the examples seen above to plastering NYC with anti-Bush assassination target practice posters (and many, many other similar expressions like these seen here (http://riffenberg.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/kill_bush_sights1.jpg), here (http://robertwaters.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/bush-target1.jpg), here (http://www.taintedthoughts.com/user/l/e/v/lev/items/images/19705.jpg), here (http://www.philosophyblog.com.au/images/kill-bush-posted-on-a-myspace-site.jpg), here (http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/wp-content/images2009/Bush_is_the_disease.jpg), here (http://mitchieville.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/kill_bush-liberals-are-fucking-idiots.jpg), here (http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/frugal-blog/frugal-cafe-blogzone/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/kill-bush-poster.jpg), here (http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/wp-content/images2009/bushdeadoralive.jpg), here (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_vkAnhL7OH1E/TTKCD_g60xI/AAAAAAAACu8/rCiSNrhmjLs/s1600/kill-bush-tshirt.jpg), here (http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/wp-content/images2009/killbushshirt1.jpg), here (http://images.sodahead.com/profiles/0/0/1/0/0/4/3/3/2/BT7-107904851795.jpeg)... ad nauseum)[3].


Before he became a U.S. Senator Al Franken went around telling jokes on such venues as the “Late Show with David Letterman” and“Today” about Bush Administration official Karl Rove being executed for treason (which got Matt Lauer and his crew laughing).







1. Compare the difference in reactions to a rodeo clown wearing an Obama mask (something done to other presidents). Nobody at HBO was fired or sent to re-education... er, sensitivity training classes.

2. There is the far more tame Bush Shoot Out (http://www.miniclip.com/games/bush-shoot-out/en/) where Bush is attacked inside the White House and you can play him as hiding behind his desk shooting it out with terrorists and trying to escape (imagine the outrage if Obama was the target and forced to defend himself - his supporters/the media likened a cover of New Yorker magazine (http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/080721_2008_p465.jpg) that mocked him to "a lynching" and claim that virtually every synonym used to describe him from skinny to professor is a racist code word).

3. Such signs, shirts, and depictions were quite common at anti-Bush protests and were largely ignored by the media (and declared as merely representing the view of a few members of the fringe in the few cases where they were covered) but the same media stalked Tea Party rallies looking for similar displays concerning Obama.

Zymologist
03-08-2014, 10:59 AM
Got to love it that you need to find something a musician said about Obama while erstwhile journalists were calling Bush things like a "despotic ... murderous fascist" (Keith Olberman at MSNBC). And what musicians were saying about Bush, like Natalie Maine of Dixie Chicks, I can't even post in a veiled manner in that it would be a violation of Tweb's rules about obscenities. Other entertainers like Bill Maher speak with pride of the various things they called Bush from "a catastrophe that walks like a man" and "Drinky McDumbass" to, again, things I can't even say in veiled form.

Movies were made that were fantasies about assassinating the president (Bush) and even several years later "Game of Thrones" was sticking his decapitated head on a spike (http://www.thehdroom.com/images/news/10812a.jpg)[1]. Books (http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/books/2004/08/assassination_porn.html) were written about people fantasizing about killing Bush (another book "Assassination Vacation" is a "humorous" travelogue of sites where American presidents -- all and only Republican -- were assassinated). Art exhibits at the reputable Columbia College in Chicago featured images of Bush with a gun pointed to his head (http://www.theipinionsjournal.com/img/251/3728/480/bushGUN.jpg). Video games (“The Night of Bush Capturing; A Virtual Jihadi”) were made with the goal of killing Bush (http://artthreat.net/wp-content/uploads/virtual-jihad.jpg) and again displayed in an art gallery as part of their "Free Speech Exhibition."[2]

Randi Rhodes, a talk show host on the now defunct liberal radio channel Air America, compared the Bush family to the fictitious Corleone family in the “Godfather” movies, and suggested that Bush should be assassinated. “Like Fredo, somebody ought to take him [President Bush] fishing and phuw.” Rhodes then imitated the sound of a gunshot and said, “Works for me.” In “Godfather 2,” Fredo Corleone is murdered at the end of the film on orders from his brother Michael. Rhodes had also said that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld “ought to be tortured.” Imagine if Rush Limbaugh had ever “joked” about Obama being assassinated. Then, less than a year later Rhodes did it again. In a Social Security reform bit on her program, an imaginary retiree from the fictional “American Association of Armed Retired People” says, “A spoiled child is telling us our Social Security isn't safe any more, so he’s going to fix it for us. Well, here’s your answer, you ungrateful whelp” – and then four gunshots ring out.

The left had quite a fascination with assassinating Bush ranging from the examples seen above to plastering NYC with anti-Bush assassination target practice posters (and many, many other similar expressions like these seen here (http://riffenberg.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/kill_bush_sights1.jpg), here (http://robertwaters.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/bush-target1.jpg), here (http://www.taintedthoughts.com/user/l/e/v/lev/items/images/19705.jpg), here (http://www.philosophyblog.com.au/images/kill-bush-posted-on-a-myspace-site.jpg), here (http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/wp-content/images2009/Bush_is_the_disease.jpg), here (http://mitchieville.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/kill_bush-liberals-are-fucking-idiots.jpg), here (http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/frugal-blog/frugal-cafe-blogzone/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/kill-bush-poster.jpg), here (http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/wp-content/images2009/bushdeadoralive.jpg), here (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_vkAnhL7OH1E/TTKCD_g60xI/AAAAAAAACu8/rCiSNrhmjLs/s1600/kill-bush-tshirt.jpg), here (http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/wp-content/images2009/killbushshirt1.jpg), here (http://images.sodahead.com/profiles/0/0/1/0/0/4/3/3/2/BT7-107904851795.jpeg)... ad nauseum)[3].


Before he became a U.S. Senator Al Franken went around telling jokes on such venues as the “Late Show with David Letterman” and“Today” about Bush Administration official Karl Rove being executed for treason (which got Matt Lauer and his crew laughing).







1. Compare the difference in reactions to a rodeo clown wearing an Obama mask (something done to other presidents). Nobody at HBO was fired or sent to re-education... er, sensitivity training classes.

2. There is the far more tame [http://www.miniclip.com/games/bush-shoot-out/en/]Bush Shoot Out[/url] where Bush is attacked inside the White House and you can play him as hiding behind his desk shooting it out with terrorists and trying to escape (imagine the outrage if Obama was the target and forced to defend himself - his supporters/the media likened a cover of New Yorker magazine (http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/080721_2008_p465.jpg) that mocked him to "a lynching" and claim that virtually every synonym used to describe him from skinny to professor is a racist code word).

3. Such signs, shirts, and depictions were quite common at anti-Bush protests and were largely ignored by the media (and declared as merely representing the view of a few members of the fringe in the few cases where they were covered) but the same media stalked Tea Party rallies looking for similar displays concerning Obama.

:clap:

:thumb:

Cow Poke
03-08-2014, 11:02 AM
Nobody at HBO was fired or sent to re-education... er, sensitivity training classes.

You're still sore about that, aren't you. :brood: But honest, I was NOT the one who kept stealing your juice boxes. :no: I'm just proud they weren't able to break you, bro! :highfive:

rogue06
03-08-2014, 11:06 AM
Really Jimmy? Here is something written about Abe Lincoln, during his lifetime:

"The illustrious Honest Old Abe has continued during the last week to make a fool of himself and to mortify and shame the intelligent people of this great nation. His speeches have demonstrated the fact that although originally a Herculean rail splitter and more lately a whimsical story teller and side splitter, he is no more capable of becoming a statesman, nay, even a moderate one, than the braying ass can become a noble lion. People now marvel how it came to pass that Mr. Lincoln should have been selected as the representative man of any party. His weak, wishy-washy, namby-pamby efforts, imbecile in matter, disgusting in manner, have made us the laughing stock of the whole world. The European powers will despise us because we have no better material out of which to make a President. The truth is, Lincoln is only a moderate lawyer and in the larger cities of the Union could pass for no more than a facetious pettifogger. Take him from his vocation and he loses even these small characteristics and indulges in simple twaddle which would disgrace a well bred school boy."
http://www.civilwar.org/hallowed-ground-magazine/unpopular-mr-lincoln.html

Read the entire article and see what was said about him (even by his own party and even staff). Really Jimmy, do you even think or bother to look things up BEFORE you speak?
You are correct that back during the 19th century some of the presidential campaigns were probably more vicious than what we see today.

rogue06
03-08-2014, 11:13 AM
You're still sore about that, aren't you. :brood: But honest, I was NOT the one who kept stealing your juice boxes. :no: I'm just proud they weren't able to break you, bro! :highfive:
:ahem:

In reality the only time I attended a sensitivity training class was when it was mandated company wide to help eliminate sexual harassment. Another (male) manager and I were standing out side the HR office in a particularly narrow hall waiting for the class when an openly gay employee came down the hall and passed between us and said in a high pitched voice, "ex-squeeze me." The head of the HR department had just opened the door and witnessed the incident and I turned to her and asked if this would be the sort of thing we would be discussing. She rolled her eyes, sighed and said "yes."

lilpixieofterror
03-08-2014, 11:13 AM
You are correct that back during the 19th century some of the presidential campaigns were probably more vicious than what we see today.

But according to Jimmy, Obama has it worse then all of them did. :lol:

Cow Poke
03-08-2014, 11:28 AM
But according to Jimmy, Obama has it worse then all of them did. :lol:

And ANYBODY who disagrees with Obama -- we're racists! :rant: It's ONLY cause he's black! (even though he's only half black, so maybe we try twice as hard :shrug:)

Cow Poke
03-08-2014, 11:32 AM
:ahem:

In reality the only time I attended a sensitivity training class was when it was mandated company wide to help eliminate sexual harassment. Another (male) manager and I were standing out side the HR office in a particularly narrow hall waiting for the class when an openly gay employee came down the hall and passed between us and said in a high pitched voice, "ex-squeeze me." The head of the HR department had just opened the door and witnessed the incident and I turned to her and asked if this would be the sort of thing we would be discussing. She rolled her eyes, sighed and said "yes."

My wife works for A&M University, and has to go to re-education camp twice a year. (She's SUCH a hateful racist :sigh:) It's really quite a joke, cause you have to pass a test on the computer, in which you ONLY pass if you check the right boxes. You can't disagree with ANYTHING, and unless you're pronounced "clean" by the system, you can lose your job. One of her black friends (honestly a very good friend with a sense of humor) tells my wife, "Well, I passed the test, but I still can't stand you white crackers". :shrug:

JimL
03-08-2014, 08:03 PM
I'll name just a few:

1) The "Red Line" with Syria which let genocide to continue unabated
2) The Russian "Reset"
3) The NSA Spy program
4) Benghazi
5) No response to the Arab Spring fallout
6) Allowed Iran's nuclear ambitions to continue with little resistance
7) The hasty retreat in Iraq which has Al Queda regaining strength

And those are just the big ones from a foreign policy perspective. No one respects our military might anymore. Heck, our allies barely even know which direction Obama's "fly by the seat of his pants" foreign policy will go.
What about those events Bill? Apparently you think you are making an argument against the President simply by echoing the Republican talking points, but you're not. Its a real shame too, because the politicians know that, so long as you are in their camp to begin with, you're will willing accept just about anything they tell you about anything. Heck, they even get many so called journalists to unquestioningly follow their lead. Thats one thing I have to admit that Sean Hannity gets right. True journalism or journalist's in the main stream media are a dying breed. So why don't you begin with the order in which you set them up starting with "the red line" and give me your critique. And i'm not going to argue that the president has done everything right, that he hasn't, in my opinion, made mistakes, or that i agree with everything he does. That would be idiotic. No President is infallible, they all have regrets, and always will, and i don't think that those mistakes, i.e. those talking points, is where your real discust for the President comes from anyway since as you yourself admitted you were discusted and tried to warn us about him before the country chose to ignore you and elect him anyway. But go ahead anyway, make your case against the president with regards to each of the so called policy disasters that you have above attributed to the President and I will be glad to discuss them with you.

JimL
03-08-2014, 08:56 PM
Got to love it that you need to find something a musician said about Obama while erstwhile journalists were calling Bush things like a "despotic ... murderous fascist" (Keith Olberman at MSNBC). And what musicians were saying about Bush, like Natalie Maine of Dixie Chicks, I can't even post in a veiled manner in that it would be a violation of Tweb's rules about obscenities. Other entertainers like Bill Maher speak with pride of the various things they called Bush from "a catastrophe that walks like a man" and "Drinky McDumbass" to, again, things I can't even say in veiled form.

Movies were made that were fantasies about assassinating the president (Bush) and even several years later "Game of Thrones" was sticking his decapitated head on a spike (http://www.thehdroom.com/images/news/10812a.jpg)[1]. Books (http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/books/2004/08/assassination_porn.html) were written about people fantasizing about killing Bush (another book "Assassination Vacation" is a "humorous" travelogue of sites where American presidents -- all and only Republican -- were assassinated). Art exhibits at the reputable Columbia College in Chicago featured images of Bush with a gun pointed to his head (http://www.theipinionsjournal.com/img/251/3728/480/bushGUN.jpg). Video games (“The Night of Bush Capturing; A Virtual Jihadi”) were made with the goal of killing Bush (http://artthreat.net/wp-content/uploads/virtual-jihad.jpg) and again displayed in an art gallery as part of their "Free Speech Exhibition."[2]

Randi Rhodes, a talk show host on the now defunct liberal radio channel Air America, compared the Bush family to the fictitious Corleone family in the “Godfather” movies, and suggested that Bush should be assassinated. “Like Fredo, somebody ought to take him [President Bush] fishing and phuw.” Rhodes then imitated the sound of a gunshot and said, “Works for me.” In “Godfather 2,” Fredo Corleone is murdered at the end of the film on orders from his brother Michael. Rhodes had also said that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld “ought to be tortured.” Imagine if Rush Limbaugh had ever “joked” about Obama being assassinated. Then, less than a year later Rhodes did it again. In a Social Security reform bit on her program, an imaginary retiree from the fictional “American Association of Armed Retired People” says, “A spoiled child is telling us our Social Security isn't safe any more, so he’s going to fix it for us. Well, here’s your answer, you ungrateful whelp” – and then four gunshots ring out.

The left had quite a fascination with assassinating Bush ranging from the examples seen above to plastering NYC with anti-Bush assassination target practice posters (and many, many other similar expressions like these seen here (http://riffenberg.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/kill_bush_sights1.jpg), here (http://robertwaters.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/bush-target1.jpg), here (http://www.taintedthoughts.com/user/l/e/v/lev/items/images/19705.jpg), here (http://www.philosophyblog.com.au/images/kill-bush-posted-on-a-myspace-site.jpg), here (http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/wp-content/images2009/Bush_is_the_disease.jpg), here (http://mitchieville.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/kill_bush-liberals-are-fucking-idiots.jpg), here (http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/frugal-blog/frugal-cafe-blogzone/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/kill-bush-poster.jpg), here (http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/wp-content/images2009/bushdeadoralive.jpg), here (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_vkAnhL7OH1E/TTKCD_g60xI/AAAAAAAACu8/rCiSNrhmjLs/s1600/kill-bush-tshirt.jpg), here (http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/wp-content/images2009/killbushshirt1.jpg), here (http://images.sodahead.com/profiles/0/0/1/0/0/4/3/3/2/BT7-107904851795.jpeg)... ad nauseum)[3].


Before he became a U.S. Senator Al Franken went around telling jokes on such venues as the “Late Show with David Letterman” and“Today” about Bush Administration official Karl Rove being executed for treason (which got Matt Lauer and his crew laughing).







1. Compare the difference in reactions to a rodeo clown wearing an Obama mask (something done to other presidents). Nobody at HBO was fired or sent to re-education... er, sensitivity training classes.

2. There is the far more tame Bush Shoot Out (http://www.miniclip.com/games/bush-shoot-out/en/) where Bush is attacked inside the White House and you can play him as hiding behind his desk shooting it out with terrorists and trying to escape (imagine the outrage if Obama was the target and forced to defend himself - his supporters/the media likened a cover of New Yorker magazine (http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/080721_2008_p465.jpg) that mocked him to "a lynching" and claim that virtually every synonym used to describe him from skinny to professor is a racist code word).

3. Such signs, shirts, and depictions were quite common at anti-Bush protests and were largely ignored by the media (and declared as merely representing the view of a few members of the fringe in the few cases where they were covered) but the same media stalked Tea Party rallies looking for similar displays concerning Obama.
Yes, we know all about what comedians, the fringe elements, and the propagandists that fire those elements up say and do, but Ted Nugent, and his ilk spout their racist mouths off at the request of, and to the delight of, the Republican/Tea Party politicians. Hey, Nugent even threatened to assasinate the President should he get re-elected and nary a soul in the Republican Party had the decency to put him in his place. Thats the problem, they not only rarely condemn this kind of hate speech, they actually encourage it.
BTW the Dixie chics Quote was: "we don't want this war, this violence, and we are ashamed that the president of the U.S. is from our state of Texas. Hardly the kind of thing we're talking about. And posting a bunch of unreferenced pictures isn't saying much either. But again, you didn't see politicians on the Democratic side of the isle promoting and encouraging that kind of stuff.

rogue06
03-08-2014, 10:41 PM
Yes, we know all about what comedians, the fringe elements, and the propagandists that fire those elements up say and do, but Ted Nugent, and his ilk spout their racist mouths off at the request of, and to the delight of, the Republican/Tea Party politicians. Hey, Nugent even threatened to assasinate the President should he get re-elected and nary a soul in the Republican Party had the decency to put him in his place. Thats the problem, they not only rarely condemn this kind of hate speech, they actually encourage it.
And with the exception of Nuggent such wild statements were almost only seen being made at the edges of Tea Party events whereas the attacks made against Bush were made from the speaker's platforms of liberal events such as the Occupy protests -- often with Democrat politicians nodding in approval as they were made.

I agree that political attacks from both sides have gotten increasingly harsh and coarse over the past several decades but again this is not something unheard of in American politics. During the 19th century the public was treated to a steady stream of vicious attacks delivered against political opponents. Many of the words used then (things like scalawag, reprobate, charlatan...) are looked at today as being somewhat quaint and tame but were fighting words back then which led to duels. A perfect example of this is the Burr-Hamilton duel in 1804 which was brought to a head when Hamilton called Burr a "profligate, a voluptuary in the extreme” as well as being a corrupt liar in both letters and publicly to his face at a dinner party.

Shortly before during the 1800 presidential race Jefferson called John Adams a "hideous hermaphroditical character which has neither the force and firmness of a man, nor the gentleness and sensibility of a woman." Adams campaign in turn claimed that Jefferson was “a mean-spirited, low-lived fellow, the son of a half-breed Indian squaw, sired by a Virginia mulatto father.” Adams' supporters also publicly declared that if Jefferson were to become the president, "we would see our wives and daughters the victims of legal prostitution" and he would create a nation where "murder, robbery, rape, adultery and incest will be openly taught and practiced."

The animosity that was built up between the two essentially led to the passage of the 12th Amendment which ended the idea of having the person who got the second most votes in the election for president becoming the vice president.

During the 1828 presidential campaign John Q. Adam's supporters targeted Jackson's family with particular nasty zeal saying that his mother was a prostitute and calling his wife a "convicted adulteress," "dirty black wench" and said she was prone to "open and notorious lewdness." As for Jackson himself he was accused of being a cannibal saying that after massacring over 500 Indians one evening, "the blood thirsty Jackson began again to show his cannibal propensities, by ordering his Bowman to dress a dozen of these Indian bodies for his breakfast, which he devoured without leaving even a fragment."

Apparently Adams was horrified at how nasty the attacks had become while Jackson personally organized the attacks on Adams and his character helping to spread a rumor that Adam's success as a diplomat hinged on his ability to procure prostitutes for foreign leaders and referred to him as a pimp.

The Lincoln-Douglas debates in 1858 have often been held up as classic examples of a proper civil debate (probably because of how much they were sanitized in later years), but were in fact vicious affairs full of crude language with personal insults and racial slurs being hurled.

In the 1860 presidential race Douglas described Lincoln as being a "horrid-looking wretch, sooty and scoundrelly in aspect, a cross between the nutmeg dealer, the horse-swapper and the nightman" and said he was a drunk who would "ruin more liquor than all the boys in town together.”

And the newspapers of the time were no different. "Harper's Weekly" described Lincoln using terms like "Filthy Story-Teller, Despot, Liar, Thief, Braggart, Buffoon, Usurper, Monster, Ignoramus, Old Scoundrel, Perjurer, Robher [sic], Swindler, Tyrant, Field-Butcher, Land-Pirate." The Chicago Times said the following about Lincoln's Gettysburg Address: "We did not conceive it possible that even Lincoln would produce a paper so slipshod, so loose-joined, so puerile, not alone in literary construction, but in its ideas, its sentiments, its grasp. He has outdone himself."

During the 1876 Democrats accused Rutherford B. Hayes of two particularly heinous crimes -- namely shooting his own mother and stealing the pay soldiers killed in action when he was a Union general

And who could possibly forget how Grover Cleveland was repeatedly accused by Republican opponents of fathering an illegitimate child during the 1884 campaign led by chants of "Ma! Ma! Where's my pa?" used to taunt Cleveland at rallies and while he delivered speeches. In fact children were brought to these events to lead these chants. Following Cleveland's narrow victory, the chant gained a classic rejoinder: "Gone to the White House. Ha! Ha! Ha!"

So the idea that the vicious campaigns rhetoric employed by both sides in the past couple of decades is somehow unique is completely wrong and nothing but a myth.

rogue06
03-08-2014, 10:43 PM
BTW the Dixie chics Quote was: "we don't want this war, this violence, and we are ashamed that the president of the U.S. is from our state of Texas. Hardly the kind of thing we're talking about. And posting a bunch of unreferenced pictures isn't saying much either. But again, you didn't see politicians on the Democratic side of the isle promoting and encouraging that kind of stuff.
You left out the part where Natalie Maine referred to Bush as a dumb f-word among several other things.

Darth Executor
03-08-2014, 11:02 PM
Yes, we know all about what comedians, the fringe elements, and the propagandists that fire those elements up say and do, but Ted Nugent, and his ilk spout their racist mouths off at the request of, and to the delight of, the Republican/Tea Party politicians. Hey, Nugent even threatened to assasinate the President should he get re-elected and nary a soul in the Republican Party had the decency to put him in his place. Thats the problem, they not only rarely condemn this kind of hate speech, they actually encourage it.
BTW the Dixie chics Quote was: "we don't want this war, this violence, and we are ashamed that the president of the U.S. is from our state of Texas. Hardly the kind of thing we're talking about. And posting a bunch of unreferenced pictures isn't saying much either. But again, you didn't see politicians on the Democratic side of the isle promoting and encouraging that kind of stuff.

In a country where people get their news from the Daily Show comedians are not fringe.

JimL
03-08-2014, 11:09 PM
And with the exception of Nuggent such wild statements were almost only seen being made at the edges of Tea Party events whereas the attacks made against Bush were made from the speaker's platforms of liberal events such as the Occupy protests -- often with Democrat politicians nodding in approval as they were made.

I agree that political attacks from both sides have gotten increasingly harsh and coarse over the past several decades but again this is not something unheard of in American politics. During the 19th century the public was treated to a steady stream of vicious attacks delivered against political opponents. Many of the words used then (things like scalawag, reprobate, charlatan...) are looked at today as being somewhat quaint and tame but were fighting words back then which led to duels. A perfect example of this is the Burr-Hamilton duel in 1804 which was brought to a head when Hamilton called Burr a "profligate, a voluptuary in the extreme” as well as being a corrupt liar in both letters and publicly to his face at a dinner party.

Shortly before during the 1800 presidential race Jefferson called John Adams a "hideous hermaphroditical character which has neither the force and firmness of a man, nor the gentleness and sensibility of a woman." Adams campaign in turn claimed that Jefferson was “a mean-spirited, low-lived fellow, the son of a half-breed Indian squaw, sired by a Virginia mulatto father.” Adams' supporters also publicly declared that if Jefferson were to become the president, "we would see our wives and daughters the victims of legal prostitution" and he would create a nation where "murder, robbery, rape, adultery and incest will be openly taught and practiced."

The animosity that was built up between the two essentially led to the passage of the 12th Amendment which ended the idea of having the person who got the second most votes in the election for president becoming the vice president.

During the 1828 presidential campaign John Q. Adam's supporters targeted Jackson's family with particular nasty zeal saying that his mother was a prostitute and calling his wife a "convicted adulteress," "dirty black wench" and said she was prone to "open and notorious lewdness." As for Jackson himself he was accused of being a cannibal saying that after massacring over 500 Indians one evening, "the blood thirsty Jackson began again to show his cannibal propensities, by ordering his Bowman to dress a dozen of these Indian bodies for his breakfast, which he devoured without leaving even a fragment."

Apparently Adams was horrified at how nasty the attacks had become while Jackson personally organized the attacks on Adams and his character helping to spread a rumor that Adam's success as a diplomat hinged on his ability to procure prostitutes for foreign leaders and referred to him as a pimp.

The Lincoln-Douglas debates in 1858 have often been held up as classic examples of a proper civil debate (probably because of how much they were sanitized in later years), but were in fact vicious affairs full of crude language with personal insults and racial slurs being hurled.

In the 1860 presidential race Douglas described Lincoln as being a "horrid-looking wretch, sooty and scoundrelly in aspect, a cross between the nutmeg dealer, the horse-swapper and the nightman" and said he was a drunk who would "ruin more liquor than all the boys in town together.”

And the newspapers of the time were no different. "Harper's Weekly" described Lincoln using terms like "Filthy Story-Teller, Despot, Liar, Thief, Braggart, Buffoon, Usurper, Monster, Ignoramus, Old Scoundrel, Perjurer, Robher [sic], Swindler, Tyrant, Field-Butcher, Land-Pirate." The Chicago Times said the following about Lincoln's Gettysburg Address: "We did not conceive it possible that even Lincoln would produce a paper so slipshod, so loose-joined, so puerile, not alone in literary construction, but in its ideas, its sentiments, its grasp. He has outdone himself."

During the 1876 Democrats accused Rutherford B. Hayes of two particularly heinous crimes -- namely shooting his own mother and stealing the pay soldiers killed in action when he was a Union general

And who could possibly forget how Grover Cleveland was repeatedly accused by Republican opponents of fathering an illegitimate child during the 1884 campaign led by chants of "Ma! Ma! Where's my pa?" used to taunt Cleveland at rallies and while he delivered speeches. In fact children were brought to these events to lead these chants. Following Cleveland's narrow victory, the chant gained a classic rejoinder: "Gone to the White House. Ha! Ha! Ha!"

So the idea that the vicious campaigns rhetoric employed by both sides in the past couple of decades is somehow unique is completely wrong and nothing but a myth.
Thats all fine Rogue, we all know that personal attacks are not knew. Anyone can look up the history and find personal attacks on a Presidents character. But if your argument is that what is taking place now on right wing radio, tv opinion shows, and among the republican politicians themselves with regard to Obama is no different than it has always been, then we are just going to have to agree to disagree. I've been around a long time myself and have never seen anything comprable.

Cow Poke
03-09-2014, 04:20 AM
What about those events Bill? Apparently you think you are making an argument against the President simply by echoing the Republican talking points,

How many times are you going to echo the phrase "echo the Republican talking points', "echo the Republican talking points', "echo the Republican talking points', "echo the Republican talking points'?

Do you have anything ORIGINAL to say?

Cow Poke
03-09-2014, 04:22 AM
Thats all fine Rogue, we all know that personal attacks are not knew. Anyone can look up the history and find personal attacks on a Presidents character. But if your argument is that what is taking place now on right wing radio, tv opinion shows, and among the republican politicians themselves with regard to Obama is no different than it has always been, then we are just going to have to agree to disagree. I've been around a long time myself and have never seen anything comprable.

That's because you are so blindly committed to Obama that all you can't see how bad he's messing up. Heck, even some of the liberals are having a tough time defending him, and many of the "up for reelection" democrats don't want him anywhere around.

His ratings are sinking like a rock, Jim, and for good reason. Period!

lilpixieofterror
03-09-2014, 06:10 AM
Thats all fine Rogue, we all know that personal attacks are not knew. Anyone can look up the history and find personal attacks on a Presidents character. But if your argument is that what is taking place now on right wing radio, tv opinion shows, and among the republican politicians themselves with regard to Obama is no different than it has always been, then we are just going to have to agree to disagree. I've been around a long time myself and have never seen anything comprable.

Wow, so how does that Kool-Aid taste?

Just Some Dude
03-09-2014, 07:23 AM
Got to love it that you need to find something a musician said about Obama while erstwhile journalists were calling Bush things like a "despotic ... murderous fascist" (Keith Olberman at MSNBC). And what musicians were saying about Bush, like Natalie Maine of Dixie Chicks, I can't even post in a veiled manner in that it would be a violation of Tweb's rules about obscenities. Other entertainers like Bill Maher speak with pride of the various things they called Bush from "a catastrophe that walks like a man" and "Drinky McDumbass" to, again, things I can't even say in veiled form.

Movies were made that were fantasies about assassinating the president (Bush) and even several years later "Game of Thrones" was sticking his decapitated head on a spike (http://www.thehdroom.com/images/news/10812a.jpg)[1]. Books (http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/books/2004/08/assassination_porn.html) were written about people fantasizing about killing Bush (another book "Assassination Vacation" is a "humorous" travelogue of sites where American presidents -- all and only Republican -- were assassinated). Art exhibits at the reputable Columbia College in Chicago featured images of Bush with a gun pointed to his head (http://www.theipinionsjournal.com/img/251/3728/480/bushGUN.jpg). Video games (“The Night of Bush Capturing; A Virtual Jihadi”) were made with the goal of killing Bush (http://artthreat.net/wp-content/uploads/virtual-jihad.jpg) and again displayed in an art gallery as part of their "Free Speech Exhibition."[2]

Randi Rhodes, a talk show host on the now defunct liberal radio channel Air America, compared the Bush family to the fictitious Corleone family in the “Godfather” movies, and suggested that Bush should be assassinated. “Like Fredo, somebody ought to take him [President Bush] fishing and phuw.” Rhodes then imitated the sound of a gunshot and said, “Works for me.” In “Godfather 2,” Fredo Corleone is murdered at the end of the film on orders from his brother Michael. Rhodes had also said that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld “ought to be tortured.” Imagine if Rush Limbaugh had ever “joked” about Obama being assassinated. Then, less than a year later Rhodes did it again. In a Social Security reform bit on her program, an imaginary retiree from the fictional “American Association of Armed Retired People” says, “A spoiled child is telling us our Social Security isn't safe any more, so he’s going to fix it for us. Well, here’s your answer, you ungrateful whelp” – and then four gunshots ring out.

The left had quite a fascination with assassinating Bush ranging from the examples seen above to plastering NYC with anti-Bush assassination target practice posters (and many, many other similar expressions like these seen here (http://riffenberg.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/kill_bush_sights1.jpg), here (http://robertwaters.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/bush-target1.jpg), here (http://www.taintedthoughts.com/user/l/e/v/lev/items/images/19705.jpg), here (http://www.philosophyblog.com.au/images/kill-bush-posted-on-a-myspace-site.jpg), here (http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/wp-content/images2009/Bush_is_the_disease.jpg), here (http://mitchieville.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/kill_bush-liberals-are-fucking-idiots.jpg), here (http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/frugal-blog/frugal-cafe-blogzone/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/kill-bush-poster.jpg), here (http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/wp-content/images2009/bushdeadoralive.jpg), here (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_vkAnhL7OH1E/TTKCD_g60xI/AAAAAAAACu8/rCiSNrhmjLs/s1600/kill-bush-tshirt.jpg), here (http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/wp-content/images2009/killbushshirt1.jpg), here (http://images.sodahead.com/profiles/0/0/1/0/0/4/3/3/2/BT7-107904851795.jpeg)... ad nauseum)[3].


Before he became a U.S. Senator Al Franken went around telling jokes on such venues as the “Late Show with David Letterman” and“Today” about Bush Administration official Karl Rove being executed for treason (which got Matt Lauer and his crew laughing).







1. Compare the difference in reactions to a rodeo clown wearing an Obama mask (something done to other presidents). Nobody at HBO was fired or sent to re-education... er, sensitivity training classes.

2. There is the far more tame Bush Shoot Out (http://www.miniclip.com/games/bush-shoot-out/en/) where Bush is attacked inside the White House and you can play him as hiding behind his desk shooting it out with terrorists and trying to escape (imagine the outrage if Obama was the target and forced to defend himself - his supporters/the media likened a cover of New Yorker magazine (http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/080721_2008_p465.jpg) that mocked him to "a lynching" and claim that virtually every synonym used to describe him from skinny to professor is a racist code word).

3. Such signs, shirts, and depictions were quite common at anti-Bush protests and were largely ignored by the media (and declared as merely representing the view of a few members of the fringe in the few cases where they were covered) but the same media stalked Tea Party rallies looking for similar displays concerning Obama.

Very well put. Hypocrisy knows no bounds, does it?

Zymologist
03-09-2014, 12:03 PM
That's because you are so blindly committed to Obama that all you can't see how bad he's messing up. Heck, even some of the liberals are having a tough time defending him, and many of the "up for reelection" democrats don't want him anywhere around.

His ratings are sinking like a rock, Jim, and for good reason. Period!

"If you like your ratings, you can keep your ratings."

rogue06
03-09-2014, 01:22 PM
Thats all fine Rogue, we all know that personal attacks are not knew. Anyone can look up the history and find personal attacks on a Presidents character. But if your argument is that what is taking place now on right wing radio, tv opinion shows, and among the republican politicians themselves with regard to Obama is no different than it has always been, then we are just going to have to agree to disagree. I've been around a long time myself and have never seen anything comprable.
The thing is that they were if anything worse back then than now. Show many anything comparable to the candidates charging each other with cannibalism, shooting their mother, being a hermaphrodite, a pimp or any of the slew of things that were said in the 19th century. Things are no worse for Obama[1] than they were for Bush or Clinton except in the minds of those desperate to see any and every disagreement with him no matter how small as being a vile personal slur. On the pre-crash Tweb I posted a long list of words that suddenly became out of bounds as somehow now being racist when they were used to describe Obama -- including ones that Obama had previously used to describe himself!





1. And perhaps even better since for several years critics and even comedians were cowed into silence by the fear of being called a racist. Studies looking at late night talk shows for instance found hardly any jokes being made about Obama during nearly his entire first term in stark contrast to what had been said about the presidents before him when they were in office going back to Reagan.

Cow Poke
03-09-2014, 01:29 PM
"If you like your ratings, you can keep your ratings."

Period!

Cow Poke
03-09-2014, 01:31 PM
1. And perhaps even better since for several years critics and even comedians were cowed into silence by the fear of being called a racist.

I was gonna add that part. :brood:

rogue06
03-09-2014, 02:06 PM
I was gonna add that part. :brood:
Great minds and all that :teeth:

nickcopernicus
03-10-2014, 02:18 AM
Since this is Obama's foreign disaster thread. Let's bring up how he made America lose a war in Libya. Forget Benghazi, America lost over 300 innocent soldiers. I even heard Obama had their backgrounds checked and sent only Republican soldiers to the front lines.

Then there's Osama Bin Laden. I heard that Obama and Osama were actually bedfellows. Obama only had him killed when Osama threatened to go public with the information.

Gosh, it's so easy to make crap up and criticize the President about alleged foreign policy "failures." The only solution I've seen in this thread was to "act like Regan." So I guess Obama should have tripled the national debt, raised taxes, and passed immigration amnesty. That would have learned Putin.

It's unfortunate that the Republican Party and those who support them on this thread enforce them as being the party of "No." Their answer to everything is No - No solutions, and no progress.

The problem with having Obama Derangement Syndrome, as "Darth," not even an America citizen, is that it invalidates any what would otherwise be valid criticism of President Obama. Was the "Redline" that he [Obama] drew in Syria unwise? Of course it was. He should have known by now that he would not get international support as he did in Libya because Russia and China were butthurt from that air campaign. He also knew that he could not count on Republican support in the HOR.
For once, I agree with Sen. Marco Rubio when he said Obama should bring the matter before the UN security council, so Russia could veto it, thereby showing them to be liars when they say that they're against foreign troops intervening in other countries, except when it's them.

Anyway, my main point is that I wish some of you would get over whining about Obama. There have been better and worse. There will be better and worse in the future. If you all want these future presidents to be Republican, I suggest you all get over being the party of No.

Cow Poke
03-10-2014, 04:03 AM
Anyway, my main point is

Downright goofy.


that I wish some of you would get over whining about Obama.

Yeah, we'd rather see you whining about people whining about Obama. :glare:


There have been better and worse.

This thread is not about Jimmy Carter.


There will be better and worse in the future.

We can pray for the former, and try to prevent the latter.


If you all want these future presidents to be Republican, I suggest you all get over being the party of No.

No!

nickcopernicus
03-10-2014, 04:30 AM
Downright goofy



Yeah, we'd rather see you whining about people whining about Obama. :glare:



This thread is not about Jimmy Carter.



We can pray for the former, and try to prevent the latter.



No!
Nick:
Uhhh,, Okay?

Cow Poke
03-10-2014, 04:34 AM
Nick:
Uhhh,, Okay?

Cool!

Darth Executor
03-10-2014, 05:52 AM
I am extremely butthurt that people dare criticize a sitting president.

'k

Bill the Cat
03-10-2014, 06:01 AM
...being the party of No.

Nick, you are far too smart to be stooping to cliches like this.

Cow Poke
03-10-2014, 06:05 AM
Nick, you are far too smart to be stooping to cliches like this.

He meant "the party of know" :yes: Lots of people get those two confused.

rogue06
03-10-2014, 06:14 AM
Then there's Osama Bin Laden. I heard that Obama and Osama were actually bedfellows. Obama only had him killed when Osama threatened to go public with the information.


No you got it all wrong. Obama led SEAL Team 6 on the raid leaping from the helicopter that he flew and doing a triple backflip before landing so perfectly as to make an Olympic Gold Medal gymnast turn green with envy and then waited while those wussy Special Forces guys had to use ropes to rappel down. Then Obama led the charge all ninja like and took out Obama personally by inserting the bullets with his bare hands (he didn't need some firearm which was designed only to kill small children, puppies and grandmothers) while those good for nothing stumblebum SEALs stood around in rapt awe and amazement. Then Obama ran all the way back to Washington (the helicopter or a jet was just too slow), stopping to save ten, no twenty orphans from a burning building that some businessman lit on fire for the sheer joy of it.

Cerebrum123
03-10-2014, 06:19 AM
No you got it all wrong. Obama led SEAL Team 6 on the raid leaping from the helicopter that he flew and doing a triple backflip before landing so perfectly as to make an Olympic Gold Medal gymnast turn green with envy and then waited while those wussy Special Forces guys had to use ropes to rappel down. Then Obama led the charge all ninja like and took out Obama personally by inserting the bullets with his bare hands (he didn't need some firearm which was designed only to kill small children, puppies and grandmothers) while those good for nothing stumblebum SEALs stood around in rapt awe and amazement. Then Obama ran all the way back to Washington (the helicopter or a jet was just too slow), stopping to save ten, no twenty orphans from a burning building that some businessman lit on fire for the sheer joy of it.

:hehe:

rogue06
03-10-2014, 06:25 AM
:hehe:
:ahem:

Cerebrum123
03-10-2014, 06:28 AM
:ahem:

Just thought it was time for CP to notice one of YOUR spelling mistakes. :tongue:

lilpixieofterror
03-10-2014, 09:04 AM
Gosh, it's so easy to make crap up and criticize the President about alleged foreign policy "failures." The only solution I've seen in this thread was to "act like Regan." So I guess Obama should have tripled the national debt, raised taxes, and passed immigration amnesty. That would have learned Putin.

Go right ahead, show something that was 'made up' here and it is rather ironic that you bring up the things you do when well... Obama has brought the US debt to higher and higher levels, has raised taxes, and is attempting to pass immigration amnesty. I would also think the fact that Obama approval ratings would show what many people think of him.


It's unfortunate that the Republican Party and those who support them on this thread enforce them as being the party of "No." Their answer to everything is No - No solutions, and no progress.

Yet another unbacked assertion.


The problem with having Obama Derangement Syndrome, as "Darth," not even an America citizen, is that it invalidates any what would otherwise be valid criticism of President Obama. Was the "Redline" that he [Obama] drew in Syria unwise? Of course it was. He should have known by now that he would not get international support as he did in Libya because Russia and China were butthurt from that air campaign. He also knew that he could not count on Republican support in the HOR.

I wasn't aware not being a US citizen therefore means everything they say is invalid. How does that work out?


For once, I agree with Sen. Marco Rubio when he said Obama should bring the matter before the UN security council, so Russia could veto it, thereby showing them to be liars when they say that they're against foreign troops intervening in other countries, except when it's them.

Or it reveals their mentality that they don't view their former block countries as 'foreign' to begin with. Either answer, of course, doesn't reflect too well upon them.


Anyway, my main point is that I wish some of you would get over whining about Obama. There have been better and worse. There will be better and worse in the future. If you all want these future presidents to be Republican, I suggest you all get over being the party of No.

Whatever in the world that is suppose to mean. :lolo:

rogue06
03-10-2014, 12:45 PM
Just thought it was time for CP to notice one of YOUR spelling mistakes. :tongue:
I handed one to him a silver platter earlier just so he could scold me. But he didn't :bawl:

Cow Poke
03-10-2014, 12:47 PM
I handed one to him a silver platter earlier just so he could scold me. But he didn't :bawl:

I've been preaching on GRACE, lately.


(no, not the lady you tried to date :glare:)

JimL
03-10-2014, 05:38 PM
That's because you are so blindly committed to Obama that all you can't see how bad he's messing up. Heck, even some of the liberals are having a tough time defending him, and many of the "up for reelection" democrats don't want him anywhere around.

His ratings are sinking like a rock, Jim, and for good reason. Period!
Obamas ratings aren't half as bad as the ratings of your do nothing congress. The only way you can win elections is through your gerrymandered districts and repression of voting rights tactics.

JimL
03-10-2014, 05:51 PM
How many times are you going to echo the phrase "echo the Republican talking points', "echo the Republican talking points', "echo the Republican talking points', "echo the Republican talking points'?

Do you have anything ORIGINAL to say?
Perhaps you should ask that of the conservative talking heads instead of echoing them verbatim-et-literatim.

lilpixieofterror
03-10-2014, 07:00 PM
Obamas ratings aren't half as bad as the ratings of your do nothing congress. The only way you can win elections is through your gerrymandered districts and repression of voting rights tactics.

Last I checked, the Senate was under democrat control, so it is as much your 'do nothing congress' as it is any republicans 'do nothing congress'. Also, how many times do you need to hear that CP isn't a republican until you finally figure it out?

JimL
03-10-2014, 08:15 PM
Last I checked, the Senate was under democrat control, so it is as much your 'do nothing congress' as it is any republicans 'do nothing congress'. Also, how many times do you need to hear that CP isn't a republican until you finally figure it out?
Yeah, but everybody knows that it is the Republicans in Congress who refuse to compromise on anything, you know, because they are so principled.:lol: As for CP's politics, i don't care what he says he is, his stance on the issues is what defines him politically as far as i'm concerned.

nickcopernicus
03-11-2014, 03:03 AM
Nick, you are far too smart to be stooping to cliches like this.
Nick:
I agree that's pretty much a tired cliché; I should have used a better way to express myself. It does, however, seem that the Republican leaders in America, especially the candidates and elected office holders pretty much spend all their time opposing anything that President Obama proposes. The HoR voted, what 47 times to repeal Obamacare? The only Ideals that I've seen from Republicans (that get any press) are tired old talking points or wish lists.

If Democrats are always asking for “additional revenue” (tax increases), Cap-And-Trade, Immigration "reform," then Republicans are always whining about the Keystone Pipeline (that happens only to run through Red States), 20 week abortion bans, and more tax cuts for the "job creators." That's what I mean about "no" ideals.

nickcopernicus
03-11-2014, 03:07 AM
Gosh Nick, You're so right. I wanna be just like you. Obama is the bestest president ever. I'm thinking of crossing the border illegally and waiting for that amnesty bill he's pushing congress to pass so I can sign up for the drone program that delivers love letters to the Muslim Brotherhood!

Nick:
Now you've go the right of it.

nickcopernicus
03-11-2014, 03:14 AM
No you got it all wrong. Obama led SEAL Team 6 on the raid leaping from the helicopter that he flew and doing a triple backflip before landing so perfectly as to make an Olympic Gold Medal gymnast turn green with envy and then waited while those wussy Special Forces guys had to use ropes to rappel down. Then Obama led the charge all ninja like and took out Obama personally by inserting the bullets with his bare hands (he didn't need some firearm which was designed only to kill small children, puppies and grandmothers) while those good for nothing stumblebum SEALs stood around in rapt awe and amazement. Then Obama ran all the way back to Washington (the helicopter or a jet was just too slow), stopping to save ten, no twenty orphans from a burning building that some businessman lit on fire for the sheer joy of it.
Nick:
Of course Obama lead the Seal Team. The Seal teams were using cameras on their helms; they were no more a part of the operation than PFC Allen on Modern Warefare II. The US Goverment teamed up with Activision to create

"Call of Duty: 1/2 Black Ops". And Obama grabbed a Playstation controller...the rest you can see in Zero Dark Thirty.

nickcopernicus
03-11-2014, 03:27 AM
Go right ahead, show something that was 'made up' here and it is rather ironic that you bring up the things you do when well... Obama has brought the US debt to higher and higher levels, has raised taxes, and is attempting to pass immigration amnesty. I would also think the fact that Obama approval ratings would show what many people think of him.
Nick:
BbbbbB.b.b.b.BenGHAZI!!!!!!!!!!

LPOT:
Yet another unbacked assertion.
Nick:
Examples available upon request.

LPOT:
I wasn't aware not being a US citizen therefore means everything they say is invalid. How does that work out?
Nick:
Since I neither said nor implied that ones' citizenship, US or otherwise, invalidated everything one said, I'm not sure how it would "work out." Perhaps you were exaggerating; otherwise you're "misinterpreting" my words.

LPOT:
Or it reveals their mentality that they don't view their former block countries as 'foreign' to begin with. Either answer, of course, doesn't reflect too well upon them.
Nick:
So you agree with me then.

LPOT:
Whatever in the world that is suppose to mean. :lolo:
Nick:
It means that I wish Republicans would put out some real ideals and learn how to compromise.

Cow Poke
03-11-2014, 05:00 AM
Yeah, but everybody knows that it is the Republicans in Congress who refuse to compromise on anything,

Liberal definition of compromise --- "agree with us on everything or else". :lolo:


you know, because they are so principled.:lol: As for CP's politics, i don't care what he says he is, his stance on the issues is what defines him politically as far as i'm concerned.

It's OK, Jimmy, my taxes pay for you to live in your mommys' basement. :wink: I'm a giver, you're a taker. :tongue:

Zymologist
03-11-2014, 07:07 AM
It means that I wish Republicans would put out some real ideals and learn how to compromise.

Ah yes, because Obama has shown himself so willing to compromise.

lilpixieofterror
03-11-2014, 07:09 AM
Yeah, but everybody knows that it is the Republicans in Congress who refuse to compromise on anything, you know, because they are so principled.:lol:

You really are living in a fantasy world, are you? Sorry Jimmy, but democrats have refused to compromise on many issues themselves, but you don't care about that because you agree with everything they say, so they can never be wrong.


As for CP's politics, i don't care what he says he is, his stance on the issues is what defines him politically as far as i'm concerned.

So you're a black/white fundy, who sees everybody as 'us vs them'. No wonder you can't argue any issues here Jimmy, you're incapable of seeing shades of gray that exist between the two points.

lilpixieofterror
03-11-2014, 07:14 AM
BbbbbB.b.b.b.BenGHAZI!!!!!!!!!!

Don't want to answer the reality, I understand it can be embarrassing to back up somebody who is making the very same mistakes you are criticizing from others. Obama raised the debt higher in his first four years, then Bush did in 8 years. You can always go to the US Treasury web site and confirm the numbers, if you really don't believe me. They are there, in black and white, for anybody capable of doing some basic math.


Examples available upon request.

They produce them here and now.


Since I neither said nor implied that ones' citizenship, US or otherwise, invalidated everything one said, I'm not sure how it would "work out." Perhaps you were exaggerating; otherwise you're "misinterpreting" my words.

So you did not try to make it sound as though DE's words and arguments don't count because he isn't a US citizen?


So you agree with me then.

Everybody is right, once in a while.


It means that I wish Republicans would put out some real ideals and learn how to compromise.

I wish Democrats would do the same, but they are too busy playing to the media about how the other side 'refuses to compromise' while they refuse to do it themselves. How funny, how everybody else, but those whom you agree with, have to 'compromise', isn't it?

JimL
03-11-2014, 06:04 PM
Liberal definition of compromise --- "agree with us on everything or else". :lolo:
How ironic, you have it bass ackwards as usual CP.



It's OK, Jimmy, my taxes pay for you to live in your mommys' basement. :wink: I'm a giver, you're a taker. :tongue:
I pay my taxes CP. The difference between us is that I am happy to do so. You're not a giver, you're a whiner.

JimL
03-11-2014, 06:22 PM
You really are living in a fantasy world, are you? Sorry Jimmy, but democrats have refused to compromise on many issues themselves, but you don't care about that because you agree with everything they say, so they can never be wrong.
There is a difference between "some" and "everything" Lilpix. This Congress is the most do nothing Congress in the history of Congress, and the reason for that is not even in question, it is, and has been, the Republicans strategy since Obama was elected. They,ve said it themselves and thats exactly what they have done, so take your head out of the sand and open your eyes.



So you're a black/white fundy, who sees everybody as 'us vs them'. No wonder you can't argue any issues here Jimmy, you're incapable of seeing shades of gray that exist between the two points.
Misrepresent much. When did I say anything about "everybody"? All I said is that I have seen CP's politics and they show him to be a Republican whether he wants to call himself an Independant or not.

Cow Poke
03-11-2014, 06:28 PM
How ironic, you have it bass ackwards as usual CP.

Bite a hole in my shorts, Jimmy.

lilpixieofterror
03-11-2014, 06:36 PM
There is a difference between "some" and "everything" Lilpix. This Congress is the most do nothing Congress in the history of Congress, and the reason for that is not even in question, it is, and has been, the Republicans strategy since Obama was elected. They,ve said it themselves and thats exactly what they have done, so take your head out of the sand and open your eyes.

:rofl:

Yep Jimmy, in the history of Congress, they have done 'nothing', but pass thousands upon thousands of laws. I guess you haven't noticed how the two houses tend to fight with one another lately, have you Jimmy? When one tries to do something, the other blocks up. Of course, you ignore when the democrats do it because you don't care what they do; you're only interested in blaming republicans for everything. Sorry Jimmy, but democrats and republicans share the blame on the current disasters going on here (although some are more the fault of one over the other). Want some democrat examples? Obamacare seems to be turning into a real disaster. Remember the, "If you like your plan, you can keep it" lie? Well, how well has that worked out for them so far? Also, during the government shutdown, can you please explain why they needed to close off memorials and spend money to do this? Can you please explain why they tried to shut down private business that were working on government property? Oh, that's right, you'll ignore those issues because democrats did it and they are the best thing since sliced bread, eh?


Misrepresent much. When did I say anything about "everybody"? All I said is that I have seen CP's politics and they show him to be a Republican whether he wants to call himself an Independant or not.

Sorry Jimmy, but there is no misrepresenting going on, at all. CP claims to be an independent and just because he agrees with republicans on some issues doesn't make him a republican. Again, are you incapable of seeing shades that exist between republican and democrats? Trust me, both parties are playing games with us and messing things up. Democrats share as much of the blame for things how they are as the republicans do. The difference is that I get this and it seems you don't.

Cow Poke
03-11-2014, 06:37 PM
Hey Jimmy ---

That thing were Obama did the RS - P E C T .... I thought he handled that really well, and you could tell by his laughing that he knew he blew it, but he played to the crowd. He was actually warm and humorous and charming! :thumb:

Cow Poke
03-11-2014, 06:40 PM
CP claims to be an independent and just because he agrees with republicans on some issues doesn't make him a republican.

Yup, I sat down and gathered the names of all my representatives, both State and National, and wrote them letters telling them I was tired of their crap, and after 40 years of voting pretty much straight-line republican, I'm leaving the GOP and registering as an Independent.

If Jimmy doesn't believe me, it's perfectly fine, cause, after all, he believes Obama! PERIOD! :eek:

lilpixieofterror
03-11-2014, 06:48 PM
Yup, I sat down and gathered the names of all my representatives, both State and National, and wrote them letters telling them I was tired of their crap, and after 40 years of voting pretty much straight-line republican, I'm leaving the GOP and registering as an Independent.

If Jimmy doesn't believe me, it's perfectly fine, cause, after all, he believes Obama! PERIOD! :eek:

Jimmy is a very confused individual. My family is pretty heavy on the democrat side and I've heard most of the democrat talking points time after time again. Sure, they do have some decent points (doesn't everybody), but both parties seem more interested in keeping themselves in power than they are in representing those they claimed to represent.

Psychic Missile
03-11-2014, 08:03 PM
Jimmy is a very confused individual. My family is pretty heavy on the democrat side and I've heard most of the democrat talking points time after time again. Sure, they do have some decent points (doesn't everybody), but both parties seem more interested in keeping themselves in power than they are in representing those they claimed to represent.

What do you think both parties can do to better represent their constituents?

Cow Poke
03-11-2014, 08:10 PM
Jimmy is a very confused individual. My family is pretty heavy on the democrat side and I've heard most of the democrat talking points time after time again. Sure, they do have some decent points (doesn't everybody), but both parties seem more interested in keeping themselves in power than they are in representing those they claimed to represent.

Yeah!

Cow Poke
03-11-2014, 08:12 PM
What do you think both parties can do to better represent their constituents?

Find the things they CAN agree on, and stop holding those things hostage as a condition to get something the other does NOT want to give up.

Cow Poke
03-12-2014, 04:27 AM
How ironic, you have it bass ackwards as usual CP.

I apologize, Jimmy. I should have been more clear -- I was talking about INCOME tax, not beer and cigarette taxes.


I pay my taxes CP.

Only YOURS? :huh: You don't volunteer MORE tax money to cover your neighbors? You can DO that, you know! There's actually a mechanism for that. :wink:


The difference between us is that I am happy to do so.

Yeah, cause you got suckered into that "you're more patriotic if you pay more taxes"?


You're not a giver, you're a whiner.

Jimmy, I probably paid more taxes last year than you paid in your entire life. And on TOP of that, I tithe, volunteer, donate blood, etc. So, you're just flat out goofy, Jimmy. :shrug:

It may come as a shock to you, Jimmy, but in ADDITION to paying taxes, Conservatives volunteer more time, give more blood, and donate more money to charities than liberals. Liberals want OTHER people to give.

Who Gives and Who Doesn't?
By JOHN STOSSEL and KRISTINA KENDALL via

There are a million ways to give to charity. Toy drives, food drives, school supply drives…telethons, walkathons, and dance-athons.

But just who is doing the giving? Three quarters of American families donate to charity, giving $1,800 each, on average. Of course, if three quarters give, that means that one quarter don't give at all. So what distinguishes those who give from those who don't? It turns out there are many myths about that.

Sioux Falls vs. San Francisco

We assume the rich give more than the middle class, the middle class more than the poor. I've heard liberals care more about the less fortunate, so we assume they give more than conservatives do. Are these assumptions truth, or myth?

To test what types of people give more, "20/20" went to two very different parts of the country, with contrasting populations: Sioux Falls, S.D. and San Francisco, Calif. The Salvation Army set up buckets at the busiest locations in each city -- Macy's in San Francisco and Wal-Mart in Sioux Falls. Which bucket collected more money?

Sioux Falls is rural and religious; half of the population goes to church every week. People in San Francisco make much more money, are predominantly liberal, and just 14 percent of people in San Francisco attend church every week. Liberals are said to care more about helping the poor; so did people in San Francisco give more?

It turns out that this idea that liberals give more…is a myth. Of the top 25 states where people give an above average percent of their income, 24 were red states in the last presidential election.

Arthur Brooks, the author of "Who Really Cares," says that "when you look at the data, it turns out the conservatives give about 30 percent more." He adds, "And incidentally, conservative-headed families make slightly less money."

And he says the differences in giving goes beyond money, pointing out that conservatives are 18 percent more likely to donate blood. He says this difference is not about politics, but about the different way conservatives and liberals view government.

"You find that people who believe it's the government's job to make incomes more equal, are far less likely to give their money away," Brooks says. In fact, people who disagree with the statement, "The government has a basic responsibility to take care of the people who can't take care of themselves," are 27 percent more likely to give to charity.


You REALLY need to try to get acquainted with TRUTH, Jimmy, and stop echoing the liberal talking points!

By the way, I wasn't online for about 3 hours last night because I was teaching the class where we're training minorities how to find jobs, fill job applications, write resumes, conduct interviews and learn job skills. At the end of the 16 week class, they earn $500 scholarships for college or training courses or for personal improvement to find a job. We're pretty flexible about how they spend that money. And WHERE does that money come from? Along with local businesses, those of us who teach the classes DONATE it.

So, this goofy notion that I'm not a giver is just... well..... typical JimmyCrap. :smile:

rogue06
03-12-2014, 07:35 AM
I pay my taxes CP. The difference between us is that I am happy to do so. You're not a giver, you're a whiner.
I've always pictured you as somebody who collects a lot more from the government than pays in income taxes.

Psychic Missile
03-12-2014, 12:02 PM
It may come as a shock to you, Jimmy, but in ADDITION to paying taxes, Conservatives volunteer more time, give more blood, and donate more money to charities than liberals. Liberals want OTHER people to give.

This is probably not true. (http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2148033)

Cow Poke
03-12-2014, 12:14 PM
This is probably not true. (http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2148033)

Please don't argue by weblink. WHICH part is "probably not true" :glare:

Darth Executor
03-12-2014, 12:16 PM
Can we stick to foreign policy discussions please?

Cow Poke
03-12-2014, 12:20 PM
Can we stick to foreign policy discussions please?

ABsolutely. Jimmy can start his own "CP is a whiner" thread. :smug:

Psychic Missile
03-12-2014, 01:05 PM
Please don't argue by weblink. WHICH part is "probably not true" :glare:

A second study was done by a different party that found the first study's (the one you referred to) methodology faulty in finding a sample's political ideology. This second study found no difference in the amount given to charity but did find a variation in what charities are given to, with conservatives giving to religious charities (including their church) more and liberals giving to secular charities more.

Cow Poke
03-12-2014, 01:07 PM
A second study

The Thread Starter requested we stay on topic. I'm complying. Please feel free to start your own thread on this.

nickcopernicus
03-14-2014, 01:40 AM
Don't want to answer the reality, I understand it can be embarrassing to back up somebody who is making the very same mistakes you are criticizing from others. Obama raised the debt higher in his first four years, then Bush did in 8 years.
Nick:
Emphasis mine. 100% wrong. Even if what you said was correct (it isn’t), your boy Regan tripled the national debt.

LPOT:
You can always go to the US Treasury web site and confirm the numbers, if you really don't believe me. They are there, in black and white, for anybody capable of doing some basic math.
Nick:
Okay Then. (http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/debt/search?startMonth=01&startDay=02&startYear=2013&endMonth=06&endDay=30&endYear=2013) Bush started his term in 2000, but we'll start at the beginning of his first Fiscal Year, 2001, and ended in 2009. End of FY 2001 (9/30) Total Debt Outstanding (TDO) : 5,807,463,412,200.06. TDO at end of FY 2009 11,909,829,003,511.70. Difference? 6,102,365,591,311.64
Obama Started in 2009. TDO Same as above. By 6/30/2013 (the treasure dept did not provide more recent exact figures), 16,738,320,054,489.20. The difference? 4,828,491,050,977.50

You’re wrong in more ways than one. First of all, your Boy Bush was getting more taxes as a percentage of the GDP than Obama so he had more money to work with and still governed like crap. Same with Saint Regan. Bush started with a surplus….ended with a 1.2trillion dollar deficit. Obama cut the deficit in half during his first term. So he’s been reducing the deficit… moving towards surpluses. Oh, he also didn’t start 2 trillion dollar unfunded wars or Medicare part D. He also didn’t facilitate the plunge of the economy into the worst recession since the great depression.
But hey, why let facts get in the way

LPOT:
They produce them here and now.
Nick:
Who are “they” and what is it that “they” produce here and now?

LPOT:
So you did not try to make it sound as though DE's words and arguments don't count because he isn't a US citizen?
Nick:
No, I did not. I simply noted that he sure takes a personal interest in things that are none of his concern seeing as how this isn’t his country. You don’t see me running around whining about Darth E’s Crackhead Mayor do you?

LPOT:
Everybody is right, once in a while.
Nick:
Satan is never right. Can I get an Amen?!

LPOT:
I wish Democrats would do the same, but they are too busy playing to the media about how the other side 'refuses to compromise' while they refuse to do it themselves. How funny, how everybody else, but those whom you agree with, have to 'compromise', isn't it?
Nick:
When the minority senate leader says that his number one priority is not to create jobs, not to fix the economy, not to keep Americans safe…..but to Make Obama a “One-term-president,” One gets the feeling that Republican leadership isn’t exactly attempting to compromise.

lilpixieofterror
03-14-2014, 06:48 AM
Emphasis mine. 100% wrong. Even if what you said was correct (it isn’t), your boy Regan tripled the national debt.

My boy Regan? Since when did he become 'my boy'? :eh: I think your black/white mentality is showing Nick. Because I am critical of Obama, I have to be a republican? Who made up that rule? Also, he 'tripled the debt'? That is pretty vague there Nick. Believe it or not, I did pass math class in high school and know how these little math games work. If you owe me 1 dollar, borrow 3 dollars and now owe me 4 dollars. Have you 'tripled' your debt? Yes you have. Now, does that mean that Joe, who owed me 50 dollars, borrows 50 more and now owes me 100 dollars better at his personal finances then you are because he only doubled his debt and you tripled yours? I'm sorry, but I am always suspicious of anybody who uses phrases like 'tripled x' because what did he triple it from and why did he triple it?


Okay Then. (http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/debt/search?startMonth=01&startDay=02&startYear=2013&endMonth=06&endDay=30&endYear=2013) Bush started his term in 2000, but we'll start at the beginning of his first Fiscal Year, 2001, and ended in 2009. End of FY 2001 (9/30) Total Debt Outstanding (TDO) : 5,807,463,412,200.06. TDO at end of FY 2009 11,909,829,003,511.70. Difference? 6,102,365,591,311.64
Obama Started in 2009. TDO Same as above. By 6/30/2013 (the treasure dept did not provide more recent exact figures), 16,738,320,054,489.20. The difference? 4,828,491,050,977.50

Then you didn't look hard enough because I found the figures right up to two days ago, but you are right on this one (hey, even a broken clock can be right once in a while), but don't worry though. Your boy Obama is already well on his way to beating Bush's record.


You’re wrong in more ways than one. First of all, your Boy Bush was getting more taxes as a percentage of the GDP than Obama so he had more money to work with and still governed like crap. Same with Saint Regan. Bush started with a surplus….ended with a 1.2trillion dollar deficit. Obama cut the deficit in half during his first term. So he’s been reducing the deficit… moving towards surpluses. Oh, he also didn’t start 2 trillion dollar unfunded wars or Medicare part D. He also didn’t facilitate the plunge of the economy into the worst recession since the great depression.

Again, what is it with this fundy mentality that if I'm critical of Obama, I have to be a Bush and Regan fan girl? Who made up that rule? Also, what did you expect Bush to do after a major terrorist attack happened against American citizens, which happened shortly after he took office? Was he suppose to say, "Ok guys, please turn yourself in." Funny how many forget how the democrats of the time were beating the warm drum, right along with the republicans and people conveniently 'forget' that little part and want to blame Bush for something democrats and republicans alike were calling for, eh? We have to forget that little part. Finally, he singly handily put us into a 'depression worse since the great depression'? How did he do that one? Was he the one that told the banks to make bad loans? Lol, you act as though Bush is some kind of evil mastermind, what possible control does Bush or Obama have over the economy? Besides, your buddy Obama has little to talk about, more Americans then ever are currently unemployed, more living below the poverty line, more are on food stamps, and rich people are even richer now, then they have been since the 1920's. Obama seems to be doing such a lovely job, right now, with that whole 'recovery' thing, isn't he? Gosh, who needs enemies when you got friends like that? Sorry Nick, but you're rather off bases here. Although I do enjoy the charges of being a republican. Obviously, you don't know that I hold the republicans at about the same level of contempt that I hold the democrats to. Both parties are more interested in playing games to keep themselves in power then they are in serving those who elect them. A good house and senate cleaning is well needed, hopefully every last one of them gets thrown out and we get a totally new congress (although that is pie in the sky stuff that I know will never happen).


But hey, why let facts get in the way

Don't worry Nick, I know you will not let the facts get in the way. :thumb:


Who are “they” and what is it that “they” produce here and now?

Most people would be smart enough to figure out I made a bit of a typo. I guess you're more interested in playing games then you are in discussing things, eh?


No, I did not. I simply noted that he sure takes a personal interest in things that are none of his concern seeing as how this isn’t his country. You don’t see me running around whining about Darth E’s Crackhead Mayor do you?

Why shouldn't he be taking an interest? By that logic, should the US care if an anti US government takes over one of our long time allies? :lolo: The US is a major political power across the world, pretty much everybody is going to have some vested interest in US policies and government since it does affect them in some way.


Satan is never right. Can I get an Amen?!

Where did Jesus say that?


When the minority senate leader says that his number one priority is not to create jobs, not to fix the economy, not to keep Americans safe…..but to Make Obama a “One-term-president,” One gets the feeling that Republican leadership isn’t exactly attempting to compromise.

Your avoidance is noted.

Cow Poke
03-14-2014, 07:30 AM
Nick:
When the minority senate leader says that his number one priority is not to create jobs, not to fix the economy, not to keep Americans safe…..but to Make Obama a “One-term-president,” One gets the feeling that Republican leadership isn’t exactly attempting to compromise.

Nick, can you actually show me where he said his number one priority is NOT any of those things? :glare: Or did you just add all that because you're somewhat of a drama queen?

The REASON he wanted Obama to be a "One-term-president" is because OBama was NOT focused on creating jobs (remember the "well, they weren't as shovel-ready as we thought" nonsense?) or fixing the economy, or keeping Americans safe --- Obama was busy fooling Americans into swallowing his disastrous health care fiasco. :glare:

lilpixieofterror
03-14-2014, 06:06 PM
Nick, can you actually show me where he said his number one priority is NOT any of those things? :glare: Or did you just add all that because you're somewhat of a drama queen?

The REASON he wanted Obama to be a "One-term-president" is because OBama was NOT focused on creating jobs (remember the "well, they weren't as shovel-ready as we thought" nonsense?) or fixing the economy, or keeping Americans safe --- Obama was busy fooling Americans into swallowing his disastrous health care fiasco. :glare:

All you need to do is check out the current unemployment and poverty levels to see just what is going on. I found this (http://www.usdebtclock.org/) web site here very interesting in giving some current numbers on lots of different issues. The US population has jumped up a few million since 2008, but the unemployment numbers have jumped, the number of people living below poverty have jumped, and the people on food stamps have jumped since 2008 by a far greater number then our population has increased by. Here it is, over 5 years after Obama has been in office and somehow, things keep getting blamed on Bush. I wonder how long it will be until Obama actually takes on the blame from people like Nick or Jimmy. I'm guessing Bush will still be to blame in 2017, just as he is today, in their minds and Obama isn't responsible for anything.

rogue06
03-14-2014, 08:12 PM
Here it is, over 5 years after Obama has been in office and somehow, things keep getting blamed on Bush. I wonder how long it will be until Obama actually takes on the blame from people like Nick or Jimmy. I'm guessing Bush will still be to blame in 2017, just as he is today, in their minds and Obama isn't responsible for anything.
I guess when you "lead from behind" you aren't responsible for anything that happens.

nickcopernicus
03-16-2014, 04:03 AM
My boy Regan? Since when did he become 'my boy'? :eh: I think your black/white mentality is showing Nick. Because I am critical of Obama, I have to be a republican?
Nick:
No, you don’t “have” to be a Republican. You’re an “Independent” that probably always votes either Republican or Libertarian. Am I wrong? If So, who is the last Liberal or progressive you voted for?


LPOT:
Who made up that rule? Also, he 'tripled the debt'? That is pretty vague there Nick. Believe it or not, I did pass math class in high school and know how these little math games work. If you owe me 1 dollar, borrow 3 dollars and now owe me 4 dollars. Have you 'tripled' your debt? Yes you have. [..stuff deleted for space...]
Nick:
When I said he “tripled the debt.” I mean exactly what I wrote. But you know what? I was wrong.

Reagan took office in January of 1981, so I used the TDO for the next FY. As of 9/28/1981, the TDO was 997,855,000,000.00. At the same point in 1989, it was 2,857,430,960,187.32. That’s an increase of 1,859,575,960,187.32, or 186%. So he didn’t actually “triple,” it; he “almost” tripled it. To triple it, the TDO would have needed to be at least $2,993,565,000,000.00. So since 2,857,430,960,187.32 is relatively close to $2,993,565,000,000.00, I think I was not far off.

LPOT:
Then you didn't look hard enough because I found the figures right up to two days ago, but you are right on this one (hey, even a broken clock can be right once in a while), but don't worry though. Your boy Obama is already well on his way to beating Bush's record.
Nick:
Shrugs, if that helps you sleep at night, you can blame Obama. But you would still be wrong. 5 years after Obama has left office, in 2022, if there are still problems with the ACA (Obamacare), I have no qualms about blaming it on Obama because that’s his child legislation.

Most of the debt we have now comes from policies that GWB either enacted, encouraged, or continued. I.e. Medicare part D, Two unfunded wars, a trillion dollar unfunded tax cut, and policies that exacerbated the financial crisis of 2008, which plunged the US into a recession, and lowered tax receipts as an obvious side effect. That’s why much of the blame can be rightly ascribed to GWB. It’s as simple as that.

If Obama is unable to clean it up, then we can say he wasn’t a good enough president to solve the problems facing America. But there is a vast difference between being unable to solve a problem and being the cause of the problem.
That’s why I blame Bush for America’s problems and Obama for being unable to fix them.

LPOT:
Again, what is it with this fundy mentality that if I'm critical of Obama, I have to be a Bush and Regan fan girl? Who made up that rule?
Nick:
The way you defend Bush below makes that rule.


LPOT:
Also, what did you expect Bush to do after a major terrorist attack happened against American citizens, which happened shortly after he took office? Was he suppose to say, "Ok guys, please turn yourself in." Funny how many forget how the democrats of the time were beating the warm drum, right along with the republicans and people conveniently 'forget' that little part and want to blame Bush for something democrats and republicans alike were calling for, eh? We have to forget that little part.
Nick:
The problem I’m discussing here is not that Bush went to war; it’s that he “forgot” to fund them. Do you know what the tax rate was during WWII? <-- That’s not a rhetorical question. That’s what real patriots looked like. What kind moron of goes to war, then cuts taxes?........Oh, wait.

LPOT:
Finally, he singly handily put us into a 'depression worse since the great depression'? How did he do that one? Was he the one that told the banks to make bad loans? Lol, you act as though Bush is some kind of evil mastermind, what possible control does Bush or Obama have over the economy?
Nick:
Emphasis mine. So now “facilitate” and “singly handily” are synonymous terms? I wrote “facilitate:” that means that he helped it happen. Not cause it all on his own.

LPOT:
Besides, your buddy Obama has little to talk about, more Americans then ever are currently unemployed, more living below the poverty line, more are on food stamps, and rich people are even richer now, then they have been since the 1920's. Obama seems to be doing such a lovely job, right now, with that whole 'recovery' thing, isn't he?
Nick:
I think Obama’s doing an okay job. I think his middle east policies were not too bad. I read an article on Politico that discussed some of the tensions that Obama has with the Pentagon and how he was determined to get out of Afghanistan by time instead of by progress. He should have insisted Iraq sign the SOFA to keep troops there, but at least his pull out policies will save us money.

As Far as Russia, I think he could take a more hard-line stance…like threaten to pull out of the START Nuclear Treaties.

LPOT:
Gosh, who needs enemies when you got friends like that? Sorry Nick, but you're rather off bases here. Although I do enjoy the charges of being a republican. Obviously, you don't know that I hold the republicans at about the same level of contempt that I hold the democrats to. Both parties are more interested in playing games to keep themselves in power then they are in serving those who elect them. A good house and senate cleaning is well needed, hopefully every last one of them gets thrown out and we get a totally new congress (although that is pie in the sky stuff that I know will never happen).
Nick:
I’m sorry Crystal, but I think it’s worse to be an “all parties are bad” kind of person than it is to be an extreme partisan. You may think both parties are corrupt, but you spend most of your time either defending Republicans, or their policies/ ideologies (prolife – pro “guns rights,” pro-businesses).
Well, at least you’re not a YEC or a Climate change denier.

LPOT:
Don't worry Nick, I know you will not let the facts get in the way. :thumb:
Nick:
We need a nostalgia smiley. I honestly was worried I’d never get the chance to exchange banter with you ever again when the website went down. Your above quip literally brought ½ of a tear to my right eye.




LPOT:
Most people would be smart enough to figure out I made a bit of a typo. I guess you're more interested in playing games then you are in discussing things, eh?
Nick:
Of course I knew you made a typo. My sarcastic question was nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt to hide the fact I was too lazy to back up my claim. I have been cured of that laziness now.
My original claim was this:

It's unfortunate that the Republican Party and those who support them on this thread enforce them as being the party of "No." Their answer to everything is No - No solutions, and no progress.
Now, my wording was both sloppy, clichéd, and very talking points-oriented. Bill the Cat was certainly right for calling me out on it. What I should have more specifically said was that

Many Republicans leaders and politicians, as well as those who defend them on this thread, offer little to no solutions to the problems facing our country, and instead generally tend to bloviate upon the alleged problems with the president. They have offered little to no solutions to their criticisms of Obama.

Here are some very specific examples.
Representative Cathy McMorris, Rogers (R-Wa), gave a response to Obama’s SOTU address. Let me first preface this by saying that there would be no realistic way for her to have listened to his speech, then wrote a response that was a direct rebuttal of his words. Well, a very skilled orator may have been able to do so, but it’s more prudent to judge our leaders by their actions, not their ability to say pretty words. Anyway, here is the transcript to her speech. (http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2014/01/28/Transcript-of-GOP-response-to-the-State-of-the-Union-address/UPI-17511390967356/).

President Obama, in his speech offered specific solutions to America’s problems. Even if you disagree with them, he said what he will actually do. (ex: raise the minimum wage for federal contractors to $10/hr) What did Rep Rogers offer?

… tonight I'd like to share a more hopeful, Republican vision...
Well…….?
“champions free markets,”-- How did that work out in 2008?

“It helps working families rise above the limits of poverty and protects our most vulnerable.” How?
“So, when I showed my 4H animals at the county fair, my parents used to say to me, "Cathy, you need to save this money so you can go to college one day!"

So I did -- I saved, I worked hard, and I became the first in my family to graduate from college.” What was the inflation-adjusted price of college when you went and now?
“To grow the working middle class, not the government;”Please name the last Republican president that “grew the working middle class” or “shrunk the government.”
I could continue on, but this is what I am talking about. Bless Rep. Rogers’ heart and her “hard work,”but her response, whoever wrote it, was an epic fail. All it offered were useless platitudes and inane antidotes’ from her personal experiences growing up in a vastly different political landscape.

nickcopernicus
03-16-2014, 04:19 AM
Nick, can you actually show me where he said his number one priority is NOT any of those things? :glare: Or did you just add all that because you're somewhat of a drama queen?

The REASON he wanted Obama to be a "One-term-president" is because OBama was NOT focused on creating jobs (remember the "well, they weren't as shovel-ready as we thought" nonsense?) or fixing the economy, or keeping Americans safe --- Obama was busy fooling Americans into swallowing his disastrous health care fiasco. :glare:
Nick:
Come now CP, You don't need me to show you that. You can figure it out on your own. (If I sound condescending, you're just going to have to forgive me because that's no how I'm trying to be.)

The phrase "number one priority" is mutually exclusive. If any one thing is the number one priorty, then by definition, anything else must not be that thing; specifically, it must be secondary, tertiary, lesser, or not a priority at all.. That's a simple tautology that is nevertheless useful becuase it demonstrates my point. A if and only if A.

If A = "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president." Mich McConnell National Journal on Oct. 23, 2010 (Source (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/when-did-mcconnell-say-he-wanted-to-make-obama-a-one-term-president/2012/09/24/79fd5cd8-0696-11e2-afff-d6c7f20a83bf_blog.html))

Then that excludes creating jobs, keeping America safe, and fixing the economy from being the "single most important thing they want to achieve." To argue otherwise is to be illogical. And you're not illogical.

Cheers,

Nick

nickcopernicus
03-16-2014, 04:20 AM
I guess when you "lead from behind" you aren't responsible for anything that happens.
Nick:
Of course. Obama has more control over the military than he does over the economy. But it's perfectly reasonable for Republicans, and Libertarians, to blame him for the economy, but give him little to no credit for having Osama Bin Laden killed.

lilpixieofterror
03-16-2014, 05:07 AM
No, you don’t “have” to be a Republican. You’re an “Independent” that probably always votes either Republican or Libertarian. Am I wrong? If So, who is the last Liberal or progressive you voted for?

Last election, now try this again Nick or do you want to keep pretending you know what my views here? I don't even look for the party under their name. I look at their record, what their views are, and if they are consistent with following the views they give.


When I said he “tripled the debt.” I mean exactly what I wrote. But you know what? I was wrong.

Reagan took office in Januar... {cut for post length}

Finally, you gave some numbers, but don't worry... your buddy Obama has already well beat that record and is well on his way to topping 20 trillion before his term is up. Don't worry though Nick, you can pretend I'm a Regan fan girl even when I say he got some things right and other things dead wrong. Hey, why tell you my views when I got you to tell me what my views are?


Shrugs, if that helps you sleep at night, you can blame Obama. But you would still be wrong. 5 years after Obama has left office, in 2022, if there are still problems with the ACA (Obamacare), I have no qualms about blaming it on Obama because that’s his child legislation.

And we have been under Obama's 'plan' for how long there Nick? Yet, unemployment has gone up, people living below poverty has gone up, and those on food stamps have gone up. This can all be confirmed, just by looking around the web and even the governments own sources will confirm all of this. Yep, looks like Obama is doing a fantastic job with his 'shovel ready' job program. :thumb: Don't worry though, you can still be blaming Bush in 2060 for all the ills of the world, rather he had much to do with it or not.


Most of the debt we have now comes from policies that GWB either enacted, encouraged, or continued. I.e. Medicare part D, Two unfunded wars, a trillion dollar unfunded tax cut, and policies that exacerbated the financial crisis of 2008, which plunged the US into a recession, and lowered tax receipts as an obvious side effect. That’s why much of the blame can be rightly ascribed to GWB. It’s as simple as that.

And who was the one beating the war drum's, right along with the republicans back in the early 2000's? Wasn't that Democrats? Who was the one that said he was going to pull troops out and we still have troops there? Wasn't that also our democrat friends? Also, funny... back in 2008, I remember even the liberal media praising the fast action of the government in bailing out business that are 'too big to fail'. What did you already forget that stuff too? Did you also forget that the whole mess that lead to the housing bubble started back in the 90's, during Clinton's era? Don't worry though, everything in Bush's fault and magically... nothing is the fault of Obama, no matter what! :rofl: How is that fantasy land working for you Nick? Sorry, but Obama is as much at fault as you want to claim Bush is, the difference is that I'm not making excuses for the mistakes Bush or Regan made, you keep making them for Obama though. Why is that?


If Obama is unable to clean it up, then we can say he wasn’t a good enough president to solve the problems facing America. But there is a vast difference between being unable to solve a problem and being the cause of the problem.
That’s why I blame Bush for America’s problems and Obama for being unable to fix them.


Sorry there Nick, but Obama has been the source for a good deal of America's problems too, so stop making excuses for him and his mistakes and just face the reality that democrats and republicans alike are to blame for the situation we currently find ourselves in. No part or president is 'fully responsible'.


The way you defend Bush below makes that rule.

You mean the way that I want to see the reality that Obama is as much at fault for the situations we find ourselves in as Bush is? Oh, I forgot... we can only blame the republicans for all the ills of the world. Democrats are magically exempt.


The problem I’m discussing here is not that Bush went to war; it’s that he “forgot” to fund them. Do you know what the tax rate was during WWII? <-- That’s not a rhetorical question. That’s what real patriots looked like. What kind moron of goes to war, then cuts taxes?........Oh, wait.

Who are the morons that approve all tax cuts and funding? Isn't that those republican and democrat morons sitting in congress? :duh: Don't believe me, here is what the US Constitution says in Article 1, section 8:

"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;"

So how did 'Bush' set the tax rate, on his own there Nick without the democrats in congress jumping on board with it? Why do people always want to blame the president and totally ignore what group is responsible for setting tax rates. Now, do keep trying with your 'Bush is to blame for everything' while totally ignoring that your buddies in Congress (including Obama, who was a member of congress, at the time) are the ones that approved it.


Emphasis mine. So now “facilitate” and “singly handily” are synonymous terms? I wrote “facilitate:” that means that he helped it happen. Not cause it all on his own.

Things don't fall apart in a single day Nick, but depressions usually are the results of actions that have been coming down the pipeline for awhile. Just as the great depression wasn't just one thing, but many things, so was this one. Bush has some of the blame, the congressmen that set it up have some of the blame, and the stupid bankers also share the blame. I'm guessing next, you're going to blame Hoover for the great depression when he just happened to be the one stuck holding the check when everything went south.


I think Obama’s doing an okay job. I think his middle east policies were not too bad. I read an article on Politico that discussed some of the tensions that Obama has with the Pentagon and how he was determined to get out of Afghanistan by time instead of by progress. He should have insisted Iraq sign the SOFA to keep troops there, but at least his pull out policies will save us money.

Such Nick, and yet... here we are, we more people living in poverty, more people on welfare, more people jobless, and more people struggling to make ends meat then ever before. If you ignore that though, he is doing a pretty bang up job. :thumb:


As Far as Russia, I think he could take a more hard-line stance…like threaten to pull out of the START Nuclear Treaties.

History seems to show us, that Russia responds more to actions then threats. Plus, it isn't as though Obama has made good on many of the threats he has made anyway, so why should Russia believe him?


I’m sorry Crystal, but I think it’s worse to be an “all parties are bad” kind of person than it is to be an extreme partisan. You may think both parties are corrupt, but you spend most of your time either defending Republicans, or their policies/ ideologies (prolife – pro “guns rights,” pro-businesses).

My dad is a Democrat that also defends gun rights and is anti abortion advocate himself, so do you really want to try this again? I wasn't aware that supporting X, makes you a republican. Gun rights are defended by the US Constitution (rather you like it or not). Considering that I was born a few months after my parents were married, what do you expect me to be Nick? I guess I was just lucky that I wasn't killed for being inconvenient, at the time? And 'pro businesses' could that be because I know many business owners and see how laws affect them first hand? Many people, in my family, are business owners and they are not evil people. Why shouldn't I support their right to open their own business and support their family with it?


Well, at least you’re not a YEC or a Climate change denier.

Well, at least we now know your mentality, if you support X group, you have to be a Republican. There is no other option, eh? Besides, don't you find it rather odd that so many Democrat members of congress, are business owners that have personal fortunes in the millions of dollars range? Do you really think that people, with vested interest in business, are going to kneecap themselves?


We need a nostalgia smiley. I honestly was worried I’d never get the chance to exchange banter with you ever again when the website went down. Your above quip literally brought ½ of a tear to my right eye.

So you will not let the facts get in the way. Got it.


Of course I knew you made a typo. My sarcastic question was nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt to hide the fact I was too lazy to back up my claim. I have been cured of that laziness now.
My original claim was this:
[indent][I]It's unfortunate that the Republic.... {snipped for post length}

Hummm, I joined the military to pay for my college and my husband's work has a program to pay for schooling, if he wants to go as well. Sorry Nick, but it can be done today as well as it was done years ago. Shoot, the internet should make many things a breeze when it comes to find scholarship information out there. Instead of whining, perhaps finding ways to do it is the way to go? After all, didn't you take the military path yourself?

lilpixieofterror
03-16-2014, 05:12 AM
Nick:
Of course. Obama has more control over the military than he does over the economy. But it's perfectly reasonable for Republicans, and Libertarians, to blame him for the economy, but give him little to no credit for having Osama Bin Laden killed.

You mean the system that was set up, by Bush that helped Obama to locate Osama Bin Laden ? Funny how all the bad stuff gets blamed on Bush, but Obama gets the credit for the good stuff. How quint. :ahem:

Cow Poke
03-16-2014, 06:00 AM
Nick:
Come now CP, You don't need me to show you that. You can figure it out on your own. (If I sound condescending, you're just going to have to forgive me because that's no how I'm trying to be.)

You sound like a Jackwagon, Nick. :shrug:

nickcopernicus
03-16-2014, 06:06 AM
If I cut out parts of your reply, it’s to reduce post length and not to “cut you off.” I apologize in advance.

Last election, now try this again Nick or do you want to keep pretending you know what my views here?
Nick:
Okay, I’ll consider myself corrected. However, you do seem to spend an inordinate amount of time defending republicans and not a lot of time (other than in Nat SCI giving good arguments against YEC) defending “liberals.” So you understand why I accuse you of being republican, right?

LPOT:
Finally, you gave some numbers, but don't worry... your buddy Obama has already well beat that record and is well on his way to topping 20 trillion before his term is up.
NICK:
IRRC, it’s been over 100 years since a president left office with the national debt less when he went in than when he took office. Therefore, every president for the last 100 years has sent new records for TDO. I’m not sure why it’s only seen as a problem when Obama took office. Sure 17T is a lot of money, but so was 10T under Bush 5T under Clinton, 2.8T under Regan, ect

LPOT:
And we have been under Obama's 'plan' for how long there Nick? Yet, unemployment has gone up, people living below poverty has gone up, and those on food stamps have gone up. This can all be confirmed, just by looking around the web and even the governments own sources will confirm all of this. Yep, looks like Obama is doing a fantastic job with his 'shovel ready' job program. :thumb: Don't worry though, you can still be blaming Bush in 2060 for all the ills of the world, rather he had much to do with it or not.
Nick:
Unemployment has went up, peaked at about 10%, then went down.
More people in poverty? There are more people living in America, plus that’s what happens in a recession; same with foodstamps. You have a passing knowledge of how economies work. I’m not sure what you think throwing those talking points out there accomplishes. So Obama should go back to what was happing when he took office? An exploding deficit, losing 700,000 jobs per month, and a shrinking economy?
What exactly should Obama have done instead. Cut taxes? Whoops, he already did that.



LPOT:
And who was the one beating the war drum's, right along with the republicans back in the early 2000's? Wasn't that Democrats?
Nick:
We’re talking about Obama. Was he beating war drums? No.

LPOT:
Who was the one that said he was going to pull troops out and we still have troops there?
Nick:
He said he was pulling out combat troops, and he did.

LPOT:
Wasn't that also our democrat friends? Also, funny... back in 2008, I remember even the liberal media praising the fast action of the government in bailing out business that are 'too big to fail'. What did you already forget that stuff too?
Nick:
The Bailout was a response to fix the problem, not the cause of the problem. Please don’t conflate these two things again. Thanks in advance.

LPOT:
Did you also forget that the whole mess that lead to the housing bubble started back in the 90's, during Clinton's era?
Nick:
No.

LPOT:
Don't worry though, everything in Bush's fault and magically... nothing is the fault of Obama, no matter what! :rofl: How is that fantasy land working for you Nick? Sorry, but Obama is as much at fault as you want to claim Bush is, the difference is that I'm not making excuses for the mistakes Bush or Regan made, you keep making them for Obama though. Why is that?
Nick:
Crystal. Please, pretty please, with sugar on top, can we have a rational discussion, in good faith, were you don’t take what I say, exaggerate it, then when I point out you’re exaggerating, you accuse me of saying the exact opposite of what I said?
Where did I say or imply that everything was Bush’s fault or even that he was remotely responsible for most of our countries’ problems?
I said I blame problems in America on Bush, but colloquially, after I said he facilitated it, it would be understood by anyone arguing with me in good faith what I meant by that.

LPOT:
You mean the way that I want to see the reality that Obama is as much at fault for the situations we find ourselves in as Bush is? Oh, I forgot... we can only blame the republicans for all the ills of the world. Democrats are magically exempt.
Nick:
:ahem:

LPOT:
Who are the morons that approve all tax cuts and funding? Isn't that those republican and democrat morons sitting in congress? :duh: Don't believe me, here is what the US Constitution says in Article 1, section 8:

"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;"
Nick:
Who controlled all three branches of government in when we declared war on terror in 2001, sent troops into Iraq in 2003? Who approved Bush’s tax cuts in 2003, why were they called “The Bush Tax Cuts” and who controlled both the house and senate?

Now you’re just being silly.


LPOT:
So how did 'Bush' set the tax rate, on his own there Nick without the democrats in congress jumping on board with it? Why do people always want to blame the president and totally ignore what group is responsible for setting tax rates. Now, do keep trying with your 'Bush is to blame for everything' while totally ignoring that your buddies in Congress (including Obama, who was a member of congress, at the time) are the ones that approved it.
Nick:
Crystal, I don’t like calling people names, but I’m afraid here you’re either ignorant of history or especially full of crap.

When Obamacare was enacted, Nancy Pelosi said it was “bi-partisan” because one moderate republican from Maine in the HoR voted for it. Her argument was as inane as yours.

Do you remember how Democrats were able to get it passed even without 60 votes in the Senate? Budget Reconciliation. What Republicans at the time said was an underhanded tactic.
Do you know how the Bush Tax Cuts were enacted in 2001 and 2003 (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/mar/04/alan-grayson/bush-tax-cuts-were-passed-reconciliations-50-votes/)? You guessed it. Hypocrite Republicans.

Do you really want to take the position of asking why I blame the unfunded wars on Bush when he asked for the budgets and tax cuts, and asked for congressional authorization for war, and then his Republican allies in congress gave it to him?

I’m afraid I’m going to have to ask you to admit you’re wrong or being very partisan here or I see no reason to continue this conversation.

nickcopernicus
03-16-2014, 06:10 AM
You sound like a Jackwagon, Nick. :shrug:
Nick:
I had to Googol this term as I had no idea what you were talking about. Apparently, it can mean anything from a male homosexual, to a formidable person, to, according to yahoo answers, the last wagon on a convoy that had to breathe a lot of dust and therefore was undesirable to be in. Hence a complainer.

You'll have to forgive me, I'm younger than you are, but apparently, you're more "hip" with the internets than I am.

So you agree that I was right?

Cow Poke
03-16-2014, 06:12 AM
Nick:
I had to Googol this term as I had no idea what you were talking about. Apparently, it can mean anything from a male homosexual, to a formidable person, to, according to yahoo answers, the last wagon on a convoy that had to breathe a lot of dust and therefore was undesirable to be in. Hence a complainer.

You'll have to forgive me, I'm younger than you are, but apparently, you're more "hip" with the internets than I am.

So you agree that I was right?

No

And it's "google", not "googol". :glare:

lilpixieofterror
03-16-2014, 06:25 PM
Grrr... stupid internet ate my entire reply, but let me help you out here Nick. Go and check the voting records for all of these things you bring up and see where the voting record works out Nick.

nickcopernicus
03-17-2014, 02:41 AM
No

And it's "google", not "googol". :glare:
Nick:
The correct spelling of a "googol" is as I have written it.

If you don't think I'm right about Senatortise McConnell then you're just being irrational.

Cow Poke
03-17-2014, 03:50 AM
Nick:
The correct spelling of a "googol" is as I have written it.

If you don't think I'm right about Senatortise McConnell then you're just being irrational.

Yeah, sure, that's it! :lolo:

nickcopernicus
03-17-2014, 04:37 AM
Source: (http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Googol.html)

"10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0.

The term was coined in 1938 by 9-year-old Milton Sirotta, nephew of Edward Kasner (Kasner 1989, pp. 20-27; Bialik 2004). Kasner then extended the term to the larger "googolplex." It should be noted that "googol" is indeed the correct spelling of the term, so the spelling "Google" refers to the internet search engine, not one with 100 zeros."

:ahem:

Your complete lack of addressing my impecible logic on McConnell has also been noted.

Cow Poke
03-17-2014, 05:44 AM
BLAH BLAH BLAH

fify

and stop beginning your posts with "Nick:"

That's just DUMB!!!!! It's like you're talking to yourself!

I bet you wear PINK on St. Patty's Day, you JACKWAGON! :glare:

Cow Poke
03-17-2014, 07:51 AM
Nick:
So you agree that I was right?

I didn't READ your post, cause it looked like you were talking to YERSEFF!!!! :rant:



(CP is just bored - he does not hate Nick:, is not angry, didn't even bother to read Nick:'s post, doesn't really care if Nick: addresses his posts to himself, although that's just DUMB, and thinks Nick: came up with this bird-brained "Googol" nonsense in a vain attempt to cover his misuse of an internet search engine term because MATH has nothing whatsoever to do with JACKWAGON!" You may now return to your regularly scheduled thread derail. (And maybe I should call Nick: "Nick Colon" instead of JACKWAGON!))

nickcopernicus
03-17-2014, 10:48 PM
Nick:
Uh, okay? :huh:

Cow Poke
03-18-2014, 04:56 AM
Nick:
Uh, okay? :huh:

And don't you forget it, Colon Nick! :glare: