toldailytopic: Is Obama really THAT bad?

[Ktoyou]

Along with Bush, averted another great depression.

Stood up against his own party in the interest of national security in Afghanistan.

Realized that closing gitmo and civilian trials for enemy combatants is very difficult, willing to make adjustments to his efforts in the best interest of the country.

Healthcare reform.

Banking reform.

Starting to work on immigration reform.

He knows what he wants to get done and he's doing it, and he's smart enough to adjust his approach to problems as needs require.

:wazzup:
Going into Afghanistan, you think that is for national security? Charley Wilson managed to acquire funds to help Afghanistan, now we are fighting them and you think it is national security? You really bought the cupcakes!

All these other credits, not that they are so credible, belong to congress. The president cannot make policy, but he can get us into another war, and keep it up as long as congress provides allocations for continued spending. Not that a Republican congress would do different.

The US is the world leader at making weapons; they sell them to the military and the military receives their funding from taxes. Who makes out. the munitions makers and who pays for it in the end, the tax payer. National security, baloney. The last involvement with Afghanistan was in the name of national security, yet we were helping Afghanistan.

All this trouble began with a lack of airport security and we still have not fixed that problem.:think:

 

[The Barbarian]

And Reagan is a great President, and proof that we don't have to settle on the one issue candidate. His mistake was making a deal with Tip O'Niel think that no good democrat would keep his end of the bargain and reel in discretionary spending.

Funny you should say that. Reagan was the one who said deficits didn't matter.

 

[kmoney]

No, I don't really BLAME him per se but he was just as blind as any other politician (perhaps more) to potential threats to the country. Then when he responds in a way, any other politician would to the threat, somehow he's magically some brilliant savior/protector of the country. It's nonsense. Nevermind all the death that happened to Americans not on US soil during the Bush administration.

How do you say more blind? I don't think any politician should have seen that coming. From what I've seen it was more a failure of the intelligence and security agencies not communicating and I'm not sure how much of that you can put on Bush or any politician. Unless you want the President to micro manage everything.

But I agree with you on your one point. As I said to SD, I don't think you can praise Bush for the lack of any attacks since 9/11.

I agree with you though I'm hoping the banking reform legislation will change that at least somewhat.

I don't think it will. All it will be is more band-aids. You can't reform a fundamentally flawed system. You have to dismantle it.

I trend to agree with you that its only a real problem that spurs good legislation but I really don't think any of us wanted to get into the situation of an economic crash. I think its been so long since anything like that has happened to the U.S. that we've forgotten how bad they can be. I think bailouts of a sort were necessary as a band aid - though I think ultimately they were not run in the most helpful manner.

But again, in my belief it's just whether we want a bad crash now or later. Why delay the pain? Just so WE don't have to deal with it. Nuts to those next generations though.

The problem is the economic growth of the US has been driven by consumer spending for a very long time. The only thing that drives said spending is people spending what they don't have.

You are exactly right. And that's a major problem. We need to adjust our entire way of thinking and spending. Both the US government and its people have been riding the wave of debt and it won't be sustainable.

I'm not sure what will change that . . .perhaps an . .economic crash? :chuckle:

Yes!

That said I really don't want to live through one, I already know how not to run up huge credit card debt . . .

Well good for you. :nananana:

 

[kmoney]

His skin color has nothing to do with it. I hate Jimmy Carter and you just as much. In fact, I did vote for a black man, just not that man. More evidence that granite is, well, stupid.

Oh, ok. So because YOU voted for a black man, Obama's skin color can't have anything to do with why OTHERS hate him. Got it. lain:

 

[bybee]

A point

A point

Oh, ok. So because YOU voted for a black man, Obama's skin color can't have anything to do with why OTHERS hate him. Got it. lain:

With respect, each persons loves and hates are subjective. Actions must be subjected to requirements of the law and requirements of accepted decency. We cannot enter into the thoughts of another person. The statement "You will know we are Christians by our love" is subjective because each of us (vis a vis TOL) implement our Christian love in a way that makes sense to us.
At this point, our presidents skin color, is not of consequence. His policies are of consequence. While he leads this nation he deserves enough cooperation to get the business of our great country accomplished. This polarization has brought us to the brink of disaster and everyone of us bear some responsibility for it. I have vowed to keep my criticisms of this administration confined to specific actions with which I disagree or find questionable. And I do cut our president some slack. He has a killer job with crushing responsibilities. Skin color, gender, political affiliation don't change that. bybee

 

[Granite]

Oh, ok. So because YOU voted for a black man, Obama's skin color can't have anything to do with why OTHERS hate him. Got it. lain:

You might want to point out to Nick that he's been on my ignore list for a while. And that he's thick as a stump and as bright as a hood...

 

[nicholsmom]

I know some racists. They tend to shock me with their rational for their racism, but they have to have one or they won't be able, in today's culture, maintaining that racism.

The rational goes like this (forgive me in advance and remember this is just as horrid and unthinkable to me as it probably is to you): I don't hate black people; I have friends that are black [maybe naming names, maybe not] I just can't stand "n...." - you know the ones. They [herein lies a description of awful human behavior]. I hate white people who act like "n..." too, though. So I'm not a racist Same story with all ethnicities.

So you might just see, Nick, why your pronouncement of having voted for a "black man" just sounds an awful lot like the above rational.

 

[Ecumenicist]

How do you say more blind? I don't think any politician should have seen that coming. From what I've seen it was more a failure of the intelligence and security agencies not communicating and I'm not sure how much of that you can put on Bush or any politician. Unless you want the President to micro manage everything.

Clinton dropped the ball after the Cole attack. Then Bush dropped the ball in not respecting the transfer of power process - and ignoring the warnings coming from Clinton's national security staff.

You can lead a mule to a symphony, but you can't make him listen.

 

[chrysostom]

Clinton dropped the ball after the Cole attack. Then Bush dropped the ball in not respecting the transfer of power process - and ignoring the warnings coming from Clinton's national security staff.

You can lead a mule to a symphony, but you can't make him listen.

you can reason with a liberal but you can't make him think

 

[Ecumenicist]

you can reason with a liberal but you can't make him think

You can't even reason with a right winger...

 

[chrysostom]

You can't even reason with a right winger...

but that wasn't clever

 

[Ecumenicist]

but that wasn't clever

 

[Zeke]

Oh, yeah, I remember all those protests with signs depicting Bush as Hitler and a witch doctor, accusing Bush of wanting to kill off old people. And oh, the hate filled emails that circulated accusing him of not being a citizen, and being a fascist, and a closet Moslem! Wait a minute, no, no I don't remember those, because they didn't happen!

Bush deserves much of the criticism he has received, but he also deserves some credit which he does not get. Like attempting immigration reform, and reacting quickly to the banking collapse.

And he deserves credit for kindof admitting the war in Iraq was a mistake, but staying the course because pulling out would have made things worse. And although the war in Iraq was wrong and false and stupid, he was right in going into Afghanistan, because that's where the 9/11 perpetrators plotted and trained.

Come on Dave do a little more research before you take the corperate media at its word! there is growing number of people including alot of the 9-11 families that don't buy the goverment version of this falsh flag fairytale.
Get off the left right carny ride, if you don't you will never see it.

 

[bybee]

And?

And?

[/U]

Come on Dave do a little more research before you take the corperate media at its word! there is growing number of people including alot of the 9-11 families that don't buy the goverment version of this falsh flag fairytale.
Get off the left right carny ride, if you don't you will never see it.

And you Zeke, are you the only holder of the truth? How does that make you different from all of the other "only" holders of the truth? bybee

 

[Alate_One]

How do you say more blind? I don't think any politician should have seen that coming. From what I've seen it was more a failure of the intelligence and security agencies not communicating and I'm not sure how much of that you can put on Bush or any politician. Unless you want the President to micro manage everything.

I think he could have had more focus on getting better communication of intelligence earlier. But unfortunately the American system is nearly always fixed and beefed up AFTER a crisis rather than before. I don't know of any recent politicians that have been particularly pro-active about anything, except perhaps for the health care reform efforts. Though you could easily maintain the system has been in crisis for a long time.

I don't think it will. All it will be is more band-aids. You can't reform a fundamentally flawed system. You have to dismantle it.

Just out of curiosity, what specifically would you do to "fix the system"?

But again, in my belief it's just whether we want a bad crash now or later. Why delay the pain? Just so WE don't have to deal with it. Nuts to those next generations though.

But see we're working on one of those "next generations". I don't want him to suffer.

You are exactly right. And that's a major problem. We need to adjust our entire way of thinking and spending. Both the US government and its people have been riding the wave of debt and it won't be sustainable.

I have hope we can wake up and smell the coffee before the crisis comes, I am an optimist after all.

However I do not believe any republican or tea party rhetoric with regards to this area because they seem to think they can balance the budget, keep social security and military spending, and not raise taxes (perhaps even lower taxes). The math simply doesn't add up.

 

[kmoney]

I think he could have had more focus on getting better communication of intelligence earlier. But unfortunately the American system is nearly always fixed and beefed up AFTER a crisis rather than before. I don't know of any recent politicians that have been particularly pro-active about anything, except perhaps for the health care reform efforts. Though you could easily maintain the system has been in crisis for a long time.

Hindsight is 20/20. That's hardly true for only Bush.

Just out of curiosity, what specifically would you do to "fix the system"?

I'm an "End the Fed" guy. I think the Fed and the fractional reserve system have allowed the debt to skyrocket. If you're interested, look up the "Money Masters" videos. I think you can find them online for free but I purchased them from their website. Any system can be abused but I think the system they propose is the best. At the very least, it seems ridiculous to me that the government BORROWS money from a private banking institution. :doh:

But see we're working on one of those "next generations". I don't want him to suffer.

Well, what about a few generations out? Those are who you are screwing over. :chuckle:

I have hope we can wake up and smell the coffee before the crisis comes, I am an optimist after all.

Optimism is for the naive.

However I do not believe any republican or tea party rhetoric with regards to this area because they seem to think they can balance the budget, keep social security and military spending, and not raise taxes (perhaps even lower taxes). The math simply doesn't add up.

That may be true, but you won't find me defending Republicans. :chuckle:

 

[Delmar]

Obama surrounds himself with Marxists and rabid anti Capitalists. I have to figure he seeks their counsel for a reason. Yes Marxism really is that bad!

 

[WandererInFog]

Funny you should say that. Reagan was the one who said deficits didn't matter.

That quote comes from a book by Ron Suskind entitled "The Price of Loyalty" about former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neil, after he had been forced out of the Bush Administration. According to that book, O'Neil claimed that at one point Vice-President Dick Cheney had said to him: "You know, Paul, Reagan proved that deficits don't matter. We won the mid-term elections, this is our due."

The closest I can find to Reagan saying anything remotely close to that was a joke he told at the annual meeting Gridiron Club in March of 1984 where he stated "I am not worried about the deficit. It is big enough to take care of itself."

 

[The Barbarian]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A26402-2004Jun8?language=printer

 

[Delmar]

Oh, ok. So because YOU voted for a black man, Obama's skin color can't have anything to do with why OTHERS hate him. Got it. lain:

That is hardly the point. Racism is real and it is a really bad thing. Accusing people of racism falsely does damage to correcting the real problem.