fr8mech
Topic Author
Posts: 6580
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 7:29 am

So, President Obama has decided to call out Fox, again, and call them 'destructive'. In fact, the quote is:

"It's a point of view that I disagree with," Obama told the magazine. "It's a point of view that I think is ultimately destructive for the long-term growth of a country that has a vibrant middle class and is competitive in the world."
NY Daily News

But, just to contrast, The President feels that MSNBC's folks are just fine. In fact, they are:

"And if you're on the left, if you're somebody like Keith Olbermann or Rachel Maddow or one of the folks who helps to keep our government honest and pushes and prods to make sure that folks are true to progressive values," Burton continued, "then he thinks that those folks provide an invaluable service. But at the same time, we need to focus our energy and our efforts on the choice that Americans have this fall."

Huffington Post

So, what do we think about that? Fox=Bad (Conservative), MSNBC=Good (Progressive).

I just don't get it. The man is probably one of the most partisan hacks to sit in the White House. At least he's not ashamed to show it.

Edit: I'd like to add that I don't recall if Bush, Clinton, Bush or Reagan ever called out a network by name. Yes, they all, as most presidents did, talked about the media, but I don't remember direct attacks. Maybe they did...

[Edited 2010-09-30 01:23:46]
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
AGM100
Posts: 5077
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 2:16 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:56 pm

I never seen anything like it .... proving he is just simply a campaigner for a party that is all he is.

Has another President ever done this ? Attacking a opposition news outlet so fervently ? It makes one wonder that if he could would he shut them down ... I am serious . I believe if he could somehow get away with it he and the Dems would simply shut down FOX.
I believe that they are in fact trying or certainly have the FCC looking into it. Jim Wallace the FCC goon , has said that Hugo Chavez had to seize the press in order to "protect his beautiful revolution". So I certainly believe our Radical president would support it since he is dreaming of a very similar revolution .
You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 5356
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:11 pm

The media as it exists today did no exist during Bush 1, Cliniton, and Reagen.

Fox news didn't start until halfway through Clinton's 2 terms, and was created to challenge CNN. It didn't even become polarizing until halfway through Bush 2's tenure.

So statements like the below, are red herrings as they have no form of context.

Quoting fr8mech (Thread starter):
Edit: I'd like to add that I don't recall if Bush, Clinton, Bush or Reagan ever called out a network by name. Yes, they all, as most presidents did, talked about the media, but I don't remember direct attacks. Maybe they did...
Quoting AGM100 (Reply 1):
Has another President ever done this ? Attacking a opposition news outlet so fervently ? It makes one wonder that if he could would he shut them down ... I am serious . I believe if he could somehow get away with it he and the Dems would simply shut down FOX.

The Media is just as polarizing as the two parties, and personally i am starting to think that no one should vote for a democrat or a republican and no one should watch fox or MSNBC, I am sick of a bunch of folks that have no interest in America, but only in their self politcal sidings.
Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9799
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:22 pm

Quoting fr8mech (Thread starter):
Edit: I'd like to add that I don't recall if Bush, Clinton, Bush or Reagan ever called out a network by name. Yes, they all, as most presidents did, talked about the media, but I don't remember direct attacks. Maybe they did...

Nixon did, but that was mostly behind closed doors. But it is pretty clear that he has the thinnest skin of any president since Nixon - maybe even more.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 2):
The media as it exists today did no exist during Bush 1, Cliniton, and Reagen.

Fox news didn't start until halfway through Clinton's 2 terms, and was created to challenge CNN. It didn't even become polarizing until halfway through Bush 2's tenure.

So statements like the below, are red herrings as they have no form of context.

Oh come on, are you saying that the media was fair back then?
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 5356
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:59 pm

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 3):
Oh come on, are you saying that the media was fair back then?

The Media at least used to be dish it out to both parties fairly equally. Now we have these Unfair and Unbalanced news outlets that are worse the the Chinese Communist State papers in controlling and directing info. MSNBC and Foxnews are far to TV news what the National Enquirer and World Weekly news were to Newstands
Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
 
NIKV69
Posts: 10889
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 3:02 pm

Quoting fr8mech (Thread starter):
So, what do we think about that? Fox=Bad (Conservative), MSNBC=Good (Progressive).

FOX shows like the Factor are the most watched by last 10 years. Nobody watches MSNBC. End of discussion.
Hey that guy with the private jet can bail us out! Why? HE CAN AFFORD IT!
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 7469
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 3:07 pm

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 5):
FOX shows like the Factor are the most watched by last 10 years. Nobody watches MSNBC. End of discussion.

And this is good, considering FOX is not even trying to be fair and balanced ?
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
planespotting
Posts: 3026
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2004 4:54 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 3:43 pm

I don't think he has thin skin - I think Fox goes over the line, mainly with their opinion pieces, but it leaches into their hard news operation as well. Obviously, I'm a liberal, but I read the Fox News website multiple times a day. I like to get news from a varity of different outlets, and they certainly provide a spin on things that varies considerably from all other US Media's point of view. I almost never agree with their spin, but appreciate the context they put on things, as it does differ from my worldview. Their headlines are slanted toward the convservative viewpoint:

FOX News: Tax cuts in limbo as lawmakers skip town
NY Times: Congress wraps up session early as midterm races loom

Which one is slanted, and which one is even? It doesn't take a genius to figure it out. Fox's headline shows genuine contempt toward Congress, thereby promoting their own viewpoint (OPINION) that this Congress sucks. The Times headline, on the other hand, tells you the facts. There's no positive or negative language at all.

But if you actually read Fox's article, it's not really slanted toward the Right by much, but the headline certainly gives the impression that it is.

I don't like to watch Hannity or Beck, mainly because their viewpoints lack any depth and the topics they flaunt are obviously designed to make the viewer believe there is some kind of terrible liberal-muslim-socialist agenda designed to ruin America. They say things like:

"Has there ever been a president that we've known so little about in the history of the United States?"

"This president hates America - I think it's just obvious!"

etc. Statements that no one argues with them about and are backed up by the same kind of blowhards (old ugly male or hot female) as the host.

On top of that - Fox has FIVE probable republican presidential candidates on their payroll as hosts or regular gusts. The five have made 269 appearances on the network, compared to six appearances on all of the other networks combined.

I mean, the points that I've made here are just a small sampling of the obvious bias the network shows every day. And I didn't even mention things like their shoddy copying and pasting of Republican talking points (straight from GOP press releases, TYPOS INCLUDED) and highlighting them as factual points on their News shows without any kind of vetting or fact checking at all.
Do you like movies about gladiators?
 
Mir
Posts: 19092
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 3:54 pm

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 3):
are you saying that the media was fair back then?

The biggest difference between now and then is that now you've got networks eschewing news programming for entertainment and commentary programming, where there is no particular journalistic obligation to be fair. Fox is not the only network to do that, but they've been the one leading the charge.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 9846
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 4:02 pm

We get all the US news outlets on satellite, I find them all generally unwatchable, I much prefer DW, BBC, Al Jazera, France 24, at least they take an interest in news outside of there own countries and I think provide a fairly balanced view of both sides of the political spectrum.
 
Alias1024
Posts: 2223
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 11:13 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 4:10 pm

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 5):
FOX shows like the Factor are the most watched by last 10 years. Nobody watches MSNBC. End of discussion.

and conservative talk radio is far more popular than liberal talk radio. Do these facts that prove that more people agree with conservatives? It's possible. Perhaps the facts only show that conservatives like to get more worked up about politics and therefore find this kind of programming more enjoyable. Maybe it's a reflection on the skill of the individual entertainers (and that's what the all are on both the right and left). Maybe it shows conservatives need daily affirmation of their beliefs and liberals don't.

Just because something is popular doesn't make it right.
It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems with just potatoes.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9799
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 4:41 pm

Quoting planespotting (Reply 7):
FOX News: Tax cuts in limbo as lawmakers skip town
NY Times: Congress wraps up session early as midterm races loom

Which one is slanted, and which one is even? It doesn't take a genius to figure it out. Fox's headline shows genuine contempt toward Congress, thereby promoting their own viewpoint (OPINION) that this Congress sucks. The Times headline, on the other hand, tells you the facts. There's no positive or negative language at all.

But if you actually read Fox's article, it's not really slanted toward the Right by much, but the headline certainly gives the impression that it is.

Granted, one shows an opinion and the other does not. But don't you think that the Congress adjourning without passing a budget and leaving 300 million Americans wondering what their tax rates are going to be just 3 months from now is just a LITTLE bit irresponsible and worthy of contempt?
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
slider
Posts: 6805
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 11:42 pm

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 4:53 pm

It’s just foreshadowing and palaver for reinstituting the so-called “Fairness Doctrine” which would essentially be the largest power grab and destructive act against the First Amendment that could be perpetrated.

Obama’s lashing out like a petulant child. Keep it up, bubba, your days in office are numbered. Your grip on power even moreso. REMEMBER IN NOVEMBER.
 
AGM100
Posts: 5077
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 2:16 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 5:18 pm

So when I Turn on Fox and hear Allen Combs , Geraldo , Beckel , Steph Miller , Juan Williams , Bill Clinton , Hillary Clinton , Peggy Noonan , Kirsten Powers , Ellis Henican , Barney Frank , The Code Pink chick , John Stewart , Michael Moore , Barach Obama , Dennis Kucinich , Michelle Obama , Rev Wright , Bill Ayres , that crazy immigration lawyer , Jesse Jackson , Al Shrapton ....... and many many other liberals ... is that destructive to the Middle class ? All of them have been guests . Fox has too many libs on for me.. to be honest .

I want to here from conservatives, and I want to here what they are planning and doing politically. I don't really care to here Allan Combs view point ... I know what it is, it is the same old boring stuff. We need to care less what the opposition is doing and work harder to get our message across ... if we win or lose is not the point its ideas and actions.
You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
 
planespotting
Posts: 3026
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2004 4:54 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 5:29 pm

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 11):
But don't you think that the Congress adjourning without passing a budget and leaving 300 million Americans wondering what their tax rates are going to be just 3 months from now is just a LITTLE bit irresponsible and worthy of contempt?

Whether I do or don't is my opinion - and it's up to me to make that decision. It's Fox "News" job to tell me what is happening without putting a slant on it, which that headline does not do. They could have even mentioned the tax cuts in the headline without being so negative:

"Congress ajourns without addressing taxes"
"Tax issue still on table as Congress adjourns"
"Midterms on the horizon as Congress tables taxes"

Or any number of other headlines that would connect Congress leaving without taking up the tax issue. Instead, Fox resorted to using "skip town" which most people associate with committing a crime or something like that.

Maybe I'm just hyper sensitive to that sort of thing because I went to journalism school - most people probably aren't. But from a journalistic prospective (which should be what Fox is trying to achieve), it's crap.

Quoting Slider (Reply 12):
It’s just foreshadowing and palaver for reinstituting the so-called “Fairness Doctrine” which would essentially be the largest power grab and destructive act against the First Amendment that could be perpetrated.

I hope the fairness doctrine is not re-enacted. But I can see valid reasons for why people think it should be.

I have to force myself to listen and read viewpoints that do not line up with my belief system or values, mainly so I do not get a one-sided take on all things. People who only rely on conservative opinion talk for their "news" are not hearing any opinions that diverge from their own. Their opinions are only reenforced by opinion, and they take that to mean that they are correct. That's not how it's supposed to work.
Do you like movies about gladiators?
 
Mir
Posts: 19092
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 5:58 pm

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 11):
But don't you think that the Congress adjourning without passing a budget and leaving 300 million Americans wondering what their tax rates are going to be just 3 months from now is just a LITTLE bit irresponsible and worthy of contempt?

Perhaps. But that's for the viewers to decide, not for Fox to declare. You know, the whole "we report, you decide" deal.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
slider
Posts: 6805
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 11:42 pm

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 6:53 pm

Quoting planespotting (Reply 14):
They could have even mentioned the tax cuts in the headline without being so negative:

"Congress ajourns without addressing taxes"
"Tax issue still on table as Congress adjourns"
"Midterms on the horizon as Congress tables taxes"

it's not the media's JOB to be "positive" don't you get it?

It's their job to be the watchdog of government, a role they abdicated a long time ago. The Founders had some great concepts on a free and indepedent media, but envisioned it as a check and balance to be the town crier for the people.

Today, the "old media" is essentially a puppet for the left leaning politics. There shouldn't be any side taken, except for the side of always asking WHY and being a bulldog to keep public servants honest.

And those headlines above are factually accurate and correct.
 
fr8mech
Topic Author
Posts: 6580
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 7:09 pm

Quoting casinterest (Reply 4):
The Media at least used to be dish it out to both parties fairly equally.

No, I 've read about the media back then (late-1700's - early-1800's) in biographies of John Adams and Ben Franklin (he took part in the attacks), among others. They were vehement and partisan, even more so than today (or so it seemed), but the higher level politicians would never attack a specific outlet. They would attack the entire sector.
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
planespotting
Posts: 3026
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2004 4:54 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 7:12 pm

Quoting Slider (Reply 16):
s not the media's JOB to be "positive" don't you get it?

Not sure where I said that the media has to be positive?

News headlines and news articles should be neutral - and "neutral" does not mean negative or always down on the government. It means neutral - like the headlines I suggested as an alternative to the Fox News headline.
Do you like movies about gladiators?
 
474218
Posts: 4510
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 12:27 pm

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 7:20 pm

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 13):
So when I Turn on Fox and hear Allen Combs , Geraldo , Beckel , Steph Miller , Juan Williams , Bill Clinton , Hillary Clinton , Peggy Noonan , Kirsten Powers , Ellis Henican , Barney Frank , The Code Pink chick , John Stewart , Michael Moore , Barach Obama , Dennis Kucinich , Michelle Obama , Rev Wright , Bill Ayres , that crazy immigration lawyer , Jesse Jackson , Al Shrapton ....... and many many other liberals ... is that destructive to the Middle class ? All of them have been guests . Fox has too many libs on for me.. to be honest .



MSNBC has conservatives on all the time: Pat Buchanan and ... and ... and ...?
 
Ken777
Posts: 9020
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 7:29 pm

Quoting fr8mech (Thread starter):
I'd like to add that I don't recall if Bush, Clinton, Bush or Reagan ever called out a network by name.

Poor FOX. Poor baby, getting named by a politician.

Oh, wait. This is Glenn Beck's network, isn't it.         

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 5):
FOX shows like the Factor are the most watched by last 10 years. Nobody watches MSNBC. End of discussion.

Every time I turned onto FOX there was some rabid talking head - I lasted 15 - 20 seconds.

Turn on MSNBC very seldom, but at least Rachel is funny at ties.

Want both sides of the political aisle in one show? CNN is the only place I have found it. It's balanced with both sides making their comments and not taking a rabid, screaming stance.

Quoting planespotting (Reply 7):
I don't think he has thin skin -

He has a black skin and that's sufficient for a lot of people against him.
 
santosdumont
Posts: 1157
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2003 7:22 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 8:15 pm

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 5):
FOX shows like the Factor are the most watched by last 10 years. Nobody watches MSNBC. End of discussion.

Sure, and Britney Spears has had more #1 hits than Led Zeppelin. End of story, right?
"Pursuit Of Truth No Matter Where It Lies" -- Metallica
 
cws818
Posts: 824
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2008 7:42 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 8:26 pm

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 5):
Nobody watches MSNBC. End of discussion.

Except you, and very often it seems!
volgende halte...Station Hollands Spoor
 
NIKV69
Posts: 10889
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 8:31 pm

Quoting santosdumont (Reply 22):
Sure, and Britney Spears has had more #1 hits than Led Zeppelin. End of story, right?

Great comparison   

The Rolling Stones still sell more tickets than anyone including Lady Gaga when they tour what's your point? FOX's ratings merely point out the majority of the country doesn't buy into the secular progressive agenda Rachel Maddow tries to push. Which the election results will also bring to light. I am sure the results will be blamed on FOX as well. Maybe sometime along the lines of they are emitting a brain wave from their building in NY and it's brainwashing the country? Get a tin foil hat!

Hey that guy with the private jet can bail us out! Why? HE CAN AFFORD IT!
 
fr8mech
Topic Author
Posts: 6580
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 8:41 pm

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 20):
He has a black skin and that's sufficient for a lot of people against him.

You really do think this is about race, don't you? I see it in other threads.

You don't think it has anything to do about his arrogance? His pettiness? His policies? His direction? His bulliness?

He acts like a petulant child when he doesn't get his way. Unfortunately, this child has political power, diminishing, but it's still there.

You don't think it has anything to do with his inability to get even his party to toe the party line?

I shudder at the whining and crying we'll hear when he is running a 2 year lame-duck administration. Wait until his media starts attacking him when they start looking for a candidate for 2012.

Please, this isn't about race, it's about his incompetence.

To paraphrase Dennis Miller...You've been a crap president. Man up and admit it.

[Edited 2010-09-30 13:47:35]
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
AGM100
Posts: 5077
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 2:16 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 8:42 pm

Quoting 474218 (Reply 19):
Pat Buchanan and ... and ... and

Yes they are doing there part at the "destructiion of the middle class " as well. I mean we cant have our poor little sheeple hearing those big bad conservatives ...
You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
 
santosdumont
Posts: 1157
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2003 7:22 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:03 pm

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 23):
Quoting santosdumont (Reply 22):
Sure, and Britney Spears has had more #1 hits than Led Zeppelin. End of story, right?

Great comparison

Nice refudiation. The point stands. Ratings are an inaccurate yardstick when what's it issue is content: Star Trek is a case in point.

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 23):
FOX's ratings merely point out the majority of the country doesn't buy into the secular progressive agenda Rachel Maddow tries to push.

It's more like "the squeaky wheel gets the grease". Secular?!! WTF? So now "street-cred" conservatives necessarily have to be religious? What happened to freedom?

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 23):
Get a tin foil hat!

Keep it. If a significant number of Right wingers think Obama is a foreign-born Muslim who also happens to be the Anti-Christ, you're gonna have to pass that hat around a lot closer to home.
"Pursuit Of Truth No Matter Where It Lies" -- Metallica
 
NIKV69
Posts: 10889
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:15 pm

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 24):
You really do think this is about race, don't you? I see it in other threads.

You don't think it has anything to do about his arrogance? His pettiness? His policies? His direction? His bulliness?

He acts like a petulant child when he doesn't get his way. Unfortunately, this child has political power, diminishing, but it's still there.

You don't think it has anything to do with his inability to get even his party to toe the party line?

I shudder at the whining and crying we'll hear when he is running a 2 year lame-duck administration. Wait until his media starts attacking him when they start looking for a candidate for 2012.

Please, this isn't about race, it's about his incompetence.

To paraphrase Dennis Miller...You've been a crap president. Man up and admit it.

[Edited 2010-09-30 13:47:35]

People that buy into this crap probably don't but they have to continue the charade. It is the only way to explain away opposition.

Quoting cws818 (Reply 22):
Except you, and very often it seems!

Keep your friends close but your enemies closer. Of course I am going to listen to what the opposition is saying.

Quoting santosdumont (Reply 26):
Nice refudiation. The point stands. Ratings are an inaccurate yardstick when what's it issue is content: Star Trek is a case in point.

Ok then we will resume this point Nov 3rd.

Quoting santosdumont (Reply 26):
Keep it. If a significant number of Right wingers think Obama is a foreign-born Muslim who also happens to be the Anti-Christ, you're gonna have to pass that hat around a lot closer to home.

Why do you bring up the birthers. I don't believe Obama is foreign born I just hate his policies.
Hey that guy with the private jet can bail us out! Why? HE CAN AFFORD IT!
 
planespotting
Posts: 3026
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2004 4:54 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:15 pm

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 24):
You don't think it has anything to do about his arrogance? His pettiness? His policies? His direction? His bulliness?

He acts like a petulant child when he doesn't get his way. Unfortunately, this child has political power, diminishing, but it's still there.

- What arrogance? He's admitted mistakes and taken blame for a lot, many things he shouldn't have, unlike the Bush administration, which almost never acknowledged any kind of blame or mistakes about anything.

- The way he has handled Fox News is about the only thing you can classify as petty, but come on - people on that network have constantly accused him of TRYING TO DESTROY THE UNITED STATES. Like, not trying to do what he thinks is right by accidentally doing it in the process - but actually trying to somehow bring down the country from within. And he's the sitting president of the country for crying out loud, and they're a major news outlet. The man has the right to threaten to not give them access to his administration.

- His policies: Cool, you disagree with his policies, that's fine.

- His direction? He's a consensus and compromise builder, which means that in the short term, no one's happy (look at his Afghanistan, healthcare, Wall Street reform strategy). They're all compromises. The man does not rule with an iron fist.

And on a side note, you'll have to forgive me for thinking that you (and other people who say those exact same words) might just be 100% racist after hearing the same words come out of only conservative white people during his entire administration.

I don't see the arrogance, the pettiness, or anything else in terms of personality that makes me think he's a bad guy or a bad president. I see that his policies somewhat differ from yours, I hear other white people accusing him of trying to destroy the country and being a supremely arrogant asshole who they absolutely, mouth-frothingly hate with a passion that you can't even attribute to Bush-era liberal hate, and that he's black.

What the hell am I supposed to think?
Do you like movies about gladiators?
 
User avatar
OA412
Crew
Posts: 3730
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2000 6:22 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:20 pm

Quoting santosdumont (Reply 21):
Sure, and Britney Spears has had more #1 hits than Led Zeppelin. End of story, right?

Checkmate, game over, it's out of the park!  
Quoting cws818 (Reply 22):
Except you, and very often it seems!

  

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 24):
You really do think this is about race, don't you? I see it in other threads.

Part of it is about race, and to bury your head in the sand and deny that race has anything to do with some of the criticism of the President, is to ignore reality. The rest of your post sounds a whole lot like criticism I could lob against our 43rd President.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 24):
To paraphrase Dennis Miller...You've been a crap president. Man up and admit it.

Hmm, I don't remember Dennis Miller asking our previous crap president to do that.

[Edited 2010-09-30 14:26:14]
Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
 
santosdumont
Posts: 1157
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2003 7:22 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:30 pm

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 27):
Quoting santosdumont (Reply 26):
Nice refudiation. The point stands. Ratings are an inaccurate yardstick when what's it issue is content: Star Trek is a case in point.

Ok then we will resume this point Nov 3rd.

Another invalid comparison. We're talking about content. Not gimmicks. Ask the segment of Obama's googly-eyed supporters who are now in the throes of a post-"Change" hangover.

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 27):
Quoting santosdumont (Reply 26):
Keep it. If a significant number of Right wingers think Obama is a foreign-born Muslim who also happens to be the Anti-Christ, you're gonna have to pass that hat around a lot closer to home.

Why do you bring up the birthers. I don't believe Obama is foreign born I just hate his policies.

Fine, that's politics. But why do 25% of Republicans surveyed think he's actually Muslim? More intriguing, why do a similar number believe he may be the Anti-Christ? That's not politics talking. That's Kool-Aid -- or worse.
"Pursuit Of Truth No Matter Where It Lies" -- Metallica
 
NIKV69
Posts: 10889
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:43 pm

Quoting OA412 (Reply 29):
Checkmate, game over, it's out of the park

Your celebrating a tad early huh? I will see if you have this enthusiam on the morning of Nov 3rd.

Quoting OA412 (Reply 29):
Part of it is about race, and to bury your head in the sand and deny that race has anything to do with some of the criticism of the President, is to ignore reality. The rest of your post sounds a whole lot like criticism I could lob against our 43rd President

None of this about race. You can't accept your man has failed and that the country has turned on him. If Kerry or Gore was president and doing these things it would have gotten the same reaction.

Quoting santosdumont (Reply 30):
Another invalid comparison

How America votes after two years of an Agenda is an invalid comparison? Yea I would expect this denial. The people have one way to speak in this country and that is voting booth.

Quoting santosdumont (Reply 30):
Ask the segment of Obama's googly-eyed supporters who are now in the throes of a post-"Change" hangover.

It's not a hangover it's the middle who was responsible for him being in the WH because he told them A and did B. It's plain to see. If your looking clearly anyway.

Quoting santosdumont (Reply 30):
Fine, that's politics. But why do 25% of Republicans surveyed think he's actually Muslim? More intriguing, why do a similar number believe he may be the Anti-Christ? That's not politics talking. That's Kool-Aid -- or worse.

Probably the same reason the same % thinks Bush planted bombs in the WTC and had Cheney shoot a missle at the Pentagon. Hatred and extremism. It exists on both sides but the right doesn't make them relevent because they aren't. The left tries to make the right wing nuts the majority because they can't debate the policies.
Hey that guy with the private jet can bail us out! Why? HE CAN AFFORD IT!
 
santosdumont
Posts: 1157
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2003 7:22 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 10:02 pm

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 31):
Quoting santosdumont (Reply 30):
Fine, that's politics. But why do 25% of Republicans surveyed think he's actually Muslim? More intriguing, why do a similar number believe he may be the Anti-Christ? That's not politics talking. That's Kool-Aid -- or worse.

Probably the same reason the same % thinks Bush planted bombs in the WTC and had Cheney shoot a missle at the Pentagon.

Nice speculation. Source.

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 31):
The people have one way to speak in this country and that is voting booth.

Wrong. Last time I checked, there was still freedom of assembly and the right to petition for redress.

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 31):
It exists on both sides but the right doesn't make them relevent because they aren't.

They aren't? The numbers say otherwise. A full quarter of Republicans surveyed believe Obama may be the Anti-Christ.

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 31):
The left tries to make the right wing nuts the majority because they can't debate the policies.

Sure, that explains the proliferation of leftist talk-radio shows. Regardless of the outcome of the midterms, the GOP is going to have its hands full trying to save what's left of the brand from Sarah Palin and Christine O'Donnell.
"Pursuit Of Truth No Matter Where It Lies" -- Metallica
 
planespotting
Posts: 3026
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2004 4:54 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 10:12 pm

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 31):
Probably the same reason the same % thinks Bush planted bombs in the WTC and had Cheney shoot a missle at the Pentagon.

Actually, 11 percent fewer people think 9/11 was an "inside job" than that Barack Obama is a Muslim.

"Last year, Public Policy Polling found that just 14 percent of Americans agreed with the statement, “President Bush intentionally allowed the 9/11 attacks to take place because he wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East."

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/201...ot-as-popular-as-ahmadinejad-says/
Do you like movies about gladiators?
 
fr8mech
Topic Author
Posts: 6580
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 10:14 pm

Quoting planespotting (Reply 28):
- What arrogance? He's admitted mistakes and taken blame for a lot, many things he shouldn't have, unlike the Bush administration, which almost never acknowledged any kind of blame or mistakes about anything.



Has he admitted Healthcare Reform is a mistake? No.
Has he admitted Stimulus 1,2,3,etc have failed? No.
Has he admitted to handling North Korea an Iran wrong? No.
Israel? No.
Economy? No.

Quoting planespotting (Reply 28):
TRYING TO DESTROY THE UNITED STATES



He may not be trying, but his policies sure do have that effect.

Quoting planespotting (Reply 28):
He's a consensus and compromise builder,


        
He has shoved policy change after regulation after reform after czars after etc. down our throats with hardly a blink. He's not a consensus builder, he's the most polarizing president we've had.

Quoting planespotting (Reply 28):
And on a side note, you'll have to forgive me for thinking that you (and other people who say those exact same words) might just be 100% racist after hearing the same words come out of only conservative white people during his entire administration.


No, I will not forgive you. Racists cry racism at every turn.

Quoting OA412 (Reply 29):
Hmm, I don't remember Dennis Miller asking our previous crap president to do that.


Because, as history will show, Bush was not a crap president. I'm sure that Carter is happy that he is about to lose the title of Worst President in Modern History to a man he supported.
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
Ken777
Posts: 9020
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 10:21 pm

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 24):
You really do think this is about race, don't you?

Not totally, no.

But there has been an undercurrent since Obama ran. Posts in national publications calling him "Obammy". Articles about the KKK increasing recruitment since he was elected.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 24):
You don't think it has anything to do about his arrogance? His pettiness? His policies? His direction? His bulliness?

Cheney set the standard for arrogance. Nixon for pettiness.

Nothing wrong with his politics IMHO. I didn't expect the Great Recession the Republicans brought us to be totally cleaned up in 20 months. I don't see the unemployment problems being solved for years, despite who runs Congress or the White House.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 24):
To paraphrase Dennis Miller...You've been a crap president. Man up and admit it.

A comment developed for Bush IIRC.

Quoting OA412 (Reply 29):
Part of it is about race, and to bury your head in the sand and deny that race has anything to do with some of the criticism of the President, is to ignore reality.

Got that right.

The ironic thing is that the "whites" are having their majority chipped away at each year. We will be the minority in the reasonably near future and the Republicans will continue to be the "White Party".

Quoting OA412 (Reply 29):
The rest of your post sounds a whole lot like criticism I could lob against our 43rd President.

Got that right also. : 
Quoting OA412 (Reply 29):
Hmm, I don't remember Dennis Miller asking our previous crap president to do that.

His VP/CEO wouldn't have let him anyway.  
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 31):
You can't accept your man has failed and that the country has turned on him.

This country expects instant gratification and the Bush/Cheney Great Recession was simply too great an economic disaster to "fix" between Obama being sworn in and the mid-term elections.

I support health care reform. Might be because I worked in Australia for years and saw the benefits of not having nanny care duped on employers. The corporate budget line for health insurance there" Zip. Zero. Phuck All.

I support efforts to motivate people to purchase fuel efficient cars and upgrade their homes. I simply believe that lowering consumption lowers long term costs. I also believe in lowering consumption via financial incentives, not tax increases on Petrol.

I also believe that the Iraq War was the worst decision by our government in my lifetime.

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 31):
If Kerry or Gore was president and doing these things it would have gotten the same reaction.

If Gore was elected president (actually, if the voters count, he was) then we would not have invaded Iraq for the Ego War.

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 31):
The people have one way to speak in this country and that is voting booth.

Damn right. Just like the voters made their decisions and gave Bush the majority in 2000.

Oooops! Well generally the will of the people rules,  
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 31):
t's not a hangover it's the middle who was responsible for him being in the WH because he told them A and did B. It's plain to see. If your looking clearly anyway.

It's people who are mad because the problems from the Great Recession were not all solved within days ofObama being sworn in.

The people are pissed because of the deficit. But they never stop to realize that the Bush Tax Cuts end on 12/31/10 simply because it allowed the Bush Administration to A-V-O-I-D making the cost public. Now we know that extending the cuts for the top 2% will be $700 Billion or higher. Toss in some inflation and we can toss the rich an extra Trillion Dollars. But that's OK with the voters as long as the Republicans tell them it is.

And then there is the fact that too many people get their health care from a nanny employer so they are not concerned about Americans in general. Sort of an "I'm right, Jack" attitude that will end as their employers stop paying over priced insurance.

Funny thing is that these same voters actually believe that the Tea Party and the Other Republicans can actually improve things. They'll probably vote for Bush III in 2012 also.
 
NIKV69
Posts: 10889
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 10:25 pm

Quoting santosdumont (Reply 32):
Nice speculation. Source.

LOL Your telling me the truther movement doesn't exist? This doesn't even deserve a response but I will provide you with proof your side has crazies just like my side does.

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20040830120349841

Quoting santosdumont (Reply 32):
They aren't? The numbers say otherwise. A full quarter of Republicans surveyed believe Obama may be the Anti-Christ.

And a full % of lefties think Bush is responsible for 9/11. Again your trying to give a small % of whackjobs a big stage as a way to make everyone just as crazy. Many who oppose Obama don't believe he was born in Kenya.

Quoting santosdumont (Reply 32):
Sure, that explains the proliferation of leftist talk-radio shows. Regardless of the outcome of the midterms, the GOP is going to have its hands full trying to save what's left of the brand from Sarah Palin and Christine O'Donnell.

No they won't this is just another talking point from Ed Schultz. The people of this country don't care that O'Donnell dabbled in witchcraft. This is just more smoke and mirrors designed to try to take the voters eye off the ball. People don't care about this crap they care about being able to take more home from their paycheck and that they will have jobs. Both points Obama has failed and which is why MA turned on him by voting in Brown. Why NJ turned on him voting in Christie and why it will be a bloodbath in November.

When you get down to the meat of the matter you can't use the MSNBC hit pieces, the fancy Chicago thuggery and elitst speeches. You have to perform and Obama hasn't. It's why his polls have tanked, why his cabinet is bailing on him like a sinking ship and why he will lose control of congress and most likely won't get a second term.
Hey that guy with the private jet can bail us out! Why? HE CAN AFFORD IT!
 
santosdumont
Posts: 1157
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2003 7:22 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 11:01 pm

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 36):
Quoting santosdumont (Reply 32):
Nice speculation. Source.

LOL Your telling me the truther movement doesn't exist?

No, I'm telling you to show me factual evidence that 25% of Democrats think 9-11 was an inside job.

Quoting planespotting (Reply 33):
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 31):
Probably the same reason the same % thinks Bush planted bombs in the WTC and had Cheney shoot a missle at the Pentagon.

Actually, 11 percent fewer people think 9/11 was an "inside job" than that Barack Obama is a Muslim.

"Last year, Public Policy Polling found that just 14 percent of Americans agreed with the statement, “President Bush intentionally allowed the 9/11 attacks to take place because he wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East."

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/201...says/

Guess we have our answer.

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 36):
This doesn't even deserve a response but I will provide you with proof your side has crazies just like my side does.

I didn't say "my" side doesn't have crazies.

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 36):
Quoting santosdumont (Reply 32):
They aren't? The numbers say otherwise. A full quarter of Republicans surveyed believe Obama may be the Anti-Christ.

And a full % of lefties think Bush is responsible for 9/11. Again your trying to give a small % of whackjobs a big stage as a way to make everyone just as crazy.

25% -- I didn't make that figure up.

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 36):
Quoting santosdumont (Reply 32):
Sure, that explains the proliferation of leftist talk-radio shows. Regardless of the outcome of the midterms, the GOP is going to have its hands full trying to save what's left of the brand from Sarah Palin and Christine O'Donnell.

No they won't this is just another talking point from Ed Schultz.

Forget Ed Schultz, notice that Kaiser Karl Rove had to kiss up to Christine O'Donnell after initially criticizing her? Remember, he was the one who called the Tea Party movement "raw".

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 36):
This is just more smoke and mirrors designed to try to take the voters eye off the ball.

So you presumably have no problem with the fact that she lied about her education.

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 36):
When you get down to the meat of the matter you can't use the MSNBC hit pieces

Who said anything about MSNBC? I don't even get l that channel where I live

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 36):
the fancy Chicago thuggery and elitst (sic) speeches.

Man, these jokes just write themselves. An oxymoron and a hysterical spelling mistake in the space of seven words.

Where was the outrage toward the elites when a graduate of Yale, Harvard, and Phillips Exeter was in the White House? Or is "elitist" just a Right wing code word for people who speak English correctly and can think in a critical fashion?

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 36):
You have to perform and Obama hasn't. It's why his polls have tanked, why his cabinet is bailing on him like a sinking ship and why he will lose control of congress and most likely won't get a second term.

Two years is a long time in politics.
"Pursuit Of Truth No Matter Where It Lies" -- Metallica
 
slider
Posts: 6805
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 11:42 pm

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 11:02 pm

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 35):
Not totally, no.

But there has been an undercurrent since Obama ran. Posts in national publications calling him "Obammy". Articles about the KKK increasing recruitment since he was elected.

So disingenuous, Ken.

Imply from afar, under the guise of plausible deniability. Skip it. Why don't you just come right out and say what you're really thinking.
 
JBLUA320
Posts: 2997
Joined: Mon May 27, 2002 8:51 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 11:04 pm

I'm a moderate, so forgive me for this, but...

It took the last administration 8 years to sufficiently screw things up... I think it's only fair to give this administration at least 3 or 4 to make some big changes and get it back on track. I'm not praising the ground Obama walks on, but although two years is a long time, I think it's still too soon to call it a lame duck administration. The Bush administration, while certainly catching a lot of undue flack, did this country few favors also and laid a very difficult pathway for the Obama administration to walk.

There's a lot yet to see and the whining from the media just calls to attention the general impatience of Americans.

The jury is still out on this administration as far as I'm concerned.
 
planespotting
Posts: 3026
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2004 4:54 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 11:19 pm

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 34):
Has he admitted Healthcare Reform is a mistake? No.
Has he admitted Stimulus 1,2,3,etc have failed? No.
Has he admitted to handling North Korea an Iran wrong? No.
Israel? No.
Economy? No.

Please show that he is wrong on any of this, or that any of these have been a mistake? Other than just saying "no" and putting in emoticons. I get that you disagree with him - which is cool - but why would he admit something is a mistake without actually having proof that it is?

For instance, during the last four months Bush was in office, the economy was shedding nearly half a million jobs a month. After six months of Obama in office, unemployment stabilized at around 9.6 percent. Granted, it's been about a year and a 3 months since July of 2009, but I'll take a net job loss of zero over 15 months (Obama) much more than I would take losing half a million jobs a month (Bush).

You might even say (as some economists have) that the stimulus passed during the first few months Obama was in office resulted in the stabilization of the jobs, and that a second stimulus would provide the necessary oopmh to start bringing it down even more. But again - as a compromiser - he stopped at one and hasn't pushed for another (despite prodding from many).

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 34):
He has shoved policy change after regulation after reform after czars after etc. down our throats with hardly a blink. He's not a consensus builder, he's the most polarizing president we've had.

He told you what he was going to do when he was running for office and he did it. You may not like it, but that's what he did. And, he compromised on everything:

Afghanistan - instead of pulling out right away (left), instead of pouring hundreds of thousands of troops in (right), he did a smaller version of an Iraq style surge.

Health Care - instead of "shoving" a single payer healthcare system "down our throats" he went with an option that is much better for healthcare business.

Wall Street Reform - frankly, this didn't do enough in my opinion, but again, he did not dictate everything that was in the reform.
Do you like movies about gladiators?
 
NIKV69
Posts: 10889
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 11:25 pm

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 35):
If Gore was elected president (actually, if the voters count, he was) then we would not have invaded Iraq for the Ego War.

Votes were counted and Gore lost. The process is what it is. Deal with it.

Quoting santosdumont (Reply 37):
Guess we have our answer

Ok so 14% isn't 25% so every GOP member or Republican is a birther? It's still a minority and it means nothing unless your a Democrat trying to salvage an election your going to get creamed in by painting every person who opposes Obama as a redneck with a pickup truck waving the confederate flag chanting "Obama is a Muslim" It's failed buddy. Give it a rest.

Quoting santosdumont (Reply 37):
I didn't say "my" side doesn't have crazies

You've implied that that left whackos are quite irrelevent and the right crazies make a huge percentage of the right. Which is completely ridiculous.

Quoting santosdumont (Reply 37):
Forget Ed Schultz, notice that Kaiser Karl Rove had to kiss up to Christine O'Donnell after initially criticizing her? Remember, he was the one who called the Tea Party movement "raw".

Why the name calling? Kaiser? Come on and shelve the hatred. As for Rove he is entitled to his opinion. He did have to backpedal because he was a touch out of line.

Quoting santosdumont (Reply 37):
So you presumably have no problem with the fact that she lied about her education

More bravo sierra. I would never tolerate misrepresentation. If she lied about her education it needs to be made public and she should pay the price. Sad part about this whole situation is the DE GOP Party is really to blame here. At this point I would vote for her just because Coons is for the Pelosi big government big tax agenda and I am opposed to that but O'Donnell is a terrible candidate. She has a shot but it will probably be a seat lost that the GOP could have won like in MA.

Quoting santosdumont (Reply 37):
Who said anything about MSNBC? I don't even get l that channel where I live

Oh you get the MSNBC lite CNN and get to listen to Begala. Your lucky.

Quoting santosdumont (Reply 37):
Where was the outrage toward the elites when a graduate of Yale, Harvard, and Phillips Exeter was in the White House? Or is "elitist" just a Right wing code word for people who speak English correctly and can think in a critical fashion

No it's more of a description of someone who thinks he knows what is better for you from this own agenda and refuses to do what the people that voted for him told him to do.

Quoting santosdumont (Reply 37):
Two years is a long time in politics.

Sure is and the last two have yielded very little results.
Hey that guy with the private jet can bail us out! Why? HE CAN AFFORD IT!
 
474218
Posts: 4510
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 12:27 pm

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 11:38 pm

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 41):
Quoting santosdumont (Reply 37):
Two years is a long time in politics.

Sure is and the last two have yielded very little results.


I must disagree, the last two year have provided huge results. The problem is they have been hugely "bad".
 
fr8mech
Topic Author
Posts: 6580
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Thu Sep 30, 2010 11:40 pm

Quoting planespotting (Reply 40):
For instance, during the last four months Bush was in office


Which were the 21st-24th months (give or take) of the Pelosi/Ried congress.

Quoting planespotting (Reply 40):
After six months of Obama in office, unemployment stabilized at around 9.6 percent.


He promised Stimulus wouldn't let it get passed 8% (or so).

He promised me my healthcare insurance costs wouldn't go up because of his bill. Going up 15% this year. The only changes made were in response to Obamacare (covering "children" under 26 and removing the lifetime cap). My annual increases before that were in the 3-5% range.

Stimulus has failed. Healthcare reform will bankrupt us.

His compromises on the issues were to get HIS party to go along, not the GOP.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 35):
Articles about the KKK increasing recruitment since he was elected.


And during the Clinton years there was a marked increase in 'militia groups' that were self-identified as White Supremacists. Explain that...or do you believe that Clinton was the first black president?

Quoting JBLUA320 (Reply 39):
It took the last administration 8 years to sufficiently screw things up... I think it's only fair to give this administration at least 3 or 4 to make some big changes and get it back on track.

I disagree here.
First, the economy started to go into the tank after the Democrats took Congress. So, 2 years, not 8.
Second, the underlying strength of this nation, its people and its economy should have been able to pull out out of this recession a lot quicker than what is happening now. It is the government intervention into the market place that has slowed this recovery. All the 'big changes' that have been made have slowed things down.
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9799
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: Obama On The Attack

Fri Oct 01, 2010 12:20 am

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 35):

But there has been an undercurrent since Obama ran.

Only in the liberal media, as far as I saw.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 35):
Posts in national publications calling him "Obammy"

I have never seen that.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 35):
Articles about the KKK increasing recruitment since he was elected.

According to the Anti-Defamation League, current KKK membership is estimated to be around 5,000, nationwide, across a couple hundred chapters - there is no national organization to speak of anymore, and in spite of scaremongers, there is no evidence that they are expanding beyond their 0.0017% of the population.

http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/kkk/default.asp

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 35):
Cheney set the standard for arrogance. Nixon for pettiness.

Nixon's claim to fame is being superseded.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 35):
I didn't expect the Great Recession the Republicans brought us

Knowing how it was the sub-prime mortgage that blew up in everyone's faces, and that the sub-prime mortgage did not exist until it was mandated by the Federal government (indeed it CANNOT exist without the federal government), can you tell me what law, passed by the GOP and/or signed by a GOP president, promoted those sub-prime loans? C'mon, give it a try...

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 35):
If Gore was elected president (actually, if the voters count, he was) then we would not have invaded Iraq for the Ego War.

Here is Al Gore criticizing GHWB for not going in and getting rid of Saddam and his WMDs, regardless of what the UN said. I can find dozens of speeches by Al Gore saying the same thing - that Saddam had to be taken out, almost every year all the way until 2004 when we belatedly realized that he didn't have them any more.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJTzKPBQZ94&feature=player_embedded

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 35):
I support health care reform. Might be because I worked in Australia for years and saw the benefits of not having nanny care duped on employers. The corporate budget line for health insurance there" Zip. Zero. Phuck All.

I support efforts to motivate people to purchase fuel efficient cars and upgrade their homes. I simply believe that lowering consumption lowers long term costs. I also believe in lowering consumption via financial incentives, not tax increases on Petrol.

I support those things too. I want universal health care and making those suburbans and F350s prohibitively expensive to own. But the way this administration wants to do it is ignorant and destructive.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 35):
It's people who are mad because the problems from the Great Recession were not all solved within days ofObama being sworn in.

More like they are starting to see that the same policies that got us into trouble are being continued and even accelerated. Have you tried to get an Equity loan or a mortgage lately? Even if you own more than 50% of your house, have well over 6-digits of equity and a 6-figure salary, and have no late payments or defaults in your credit history, you'll have a tough time - as the banks have basically become branches of the federal government. I experienced that personally, and the bankers told me that in those words, pretty much. But they also told me that if I was black or hispanic, or if my income were a lot lower, they could have done something. So it's gotten worse, not better. We are headed for another mortgage crash - just you wait.

And then you have the massive spending with no end in sight and no positive effect in sight either.
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
planespotting
Posts: 3026
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2004 4:54 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:55 pm

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 43):
Which were the 21st-24th months (give or take) of the Pelosi/Ried congress.

How about you name a few legislative triumphs of the Pelosi/Reid pre-Obama Congress that were put into law without Bush's signature?

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 43):
First, the economy started to go into the tank after the Democrats took Congress.

Again, name some programs that the Pelosi/Reid Congress pushed through without republican support?

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 43):
It is the government intervention into the market place that has slowed this recovery. All the 'big changes' that have been made have slowed things down.

Please, oh wise freight mechanic, please give us more details. Lots of people would say otherwise. And here's this:

By mid-2009, the administration projected that TARP could lose $341 billion, a figure that reflected new commitments to A.I.G. and the auto industry. The Congressional Budget Office, which had a slightly higher loss estimate initially, in August reduced that to $66 billion. Now Treasury reckons that taxpayers will lose less than $50 billion at worst, but at best could break even or even make money.

And this:

“This is the best federal program of any real size to be despised by the public like this,” said Douglas J. Elliott, a former investment banker now associated with the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank. "It was probably the only effective method available to us to keep from having a financial meltdown much worse than we actually had. Had that happened, unemployment would be substantially higher than it is now, the deficit would have gone up even more than it has,” Mr. Elliott added.

And this:

“For those who were screaming at me — and screaming was the operative word — ‘You’ve just saddled our children and grandchildren with $700 billion,’ I said, ‘No, I haven’t,” Mr. Bennett said in an interview. “My career is over,” he added. “But I do hope that we can get the word out that TARP, number one, did save the world from a financial meltdown and, number two, did so in a manner that, I believe, won’t cost the taxpayer anything. And even if it did not all get paid back, it was still the thing to do.”

And this:

Zandi and Blinder offer the first comprehensive estimate of our full response to the crisis: Absent the financial rescue and the stimulus, "GDP in 2010 would be about 6 ½ percent lower, payroll employment would be less by some 8 ½ million jobs, and the nation would now be experiencing deflation."

And this:

Zandi: The mistake was for Congress to vote it down initially. That eviscerated confidence and took the equity market down to a whole other level and exacerbated our problems. By that time, the damage was so serious that the intent of TARP had to shift. Originally, it was about buying bad assets, which would've been more graceful. But because of the "no" vote and the damage it did, they had to make TARP a source of capital for the financial system. The capital purchase program was ultimately the one key thing that was necessary for stabilizing the financial system and the economy.
Do you like movies about gladiators?
 
Ken777
Posts: 9020
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Fri Oct 01, 2010 6:43 pm

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 44):
Nixon's claim to fame is being superseded.

I highly doubt that.

Now there were some "panty sniffing Republicans" that went ofter Clinton, but in the end it was show to only be political attacks. It did, however, keep the Republicans from focusing on the job of serving the people.

But Nixon was in a league of his own. An incredibly smart President (like Clinton and Obama) but dumb to be caught up in Watergate.
 
fr8mech
Topic Author
Posts: 6580
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Fri Oct 01, 2010 8:38 pm

Quoting planespotting (Reply 45):
Please, oh wise freight mechanic, please give us more details. Lots of people would say otherwise. And here's this:

First, I supported TARP. Look around, you'll see that. Not because I didn't want to see banks go under (some failed miserably in their business management) but becasue the massive influx of cash was required to show Americans and the global community that the US was serious about restoring confidence in our banking/financial system. It was a necessary move and appears to have worked.

Moving on: the recession offically ended in June 2009 (first link that showed up when I googled it). Before $1 of stimulus money was spent. With all this additional stimulus, you would think we would be booming. Unemployement down in the 507% range, housing starts up, business expenditures up, GDP growth in the 5 or 6% range, etc. But we're not, are we?

So, what happened? The big hand of government has introduced uncertainty and introduced (and passed) legislation that has slowed or stopped the recovery. Plain and simple.

Quoting planespotting (Reply 45):
How about you name a few legislative triumphs of the Pelosi/Reid pre-Obama Congress that were put into law without Bush's signature?

Unfortunately Bush was to soft on that pair. I never was a fan of Bushes spending. Look around, you'll find that also.

Quoting planespotting (Reply 45):
Please, oh wise freight mechanic,

And, how about a little toot of my horn, since you choose to personalize this a little:
My undergrad degree is in Business with double minors in eonomics and accounting.
I hold an MBA.
My wife is a Senior Manager in a large regional CPA firm (a toot for the wife).
I managed an a segment of my 'freight mechanic' operation with an operating budget of over $50 million. (I stepped down of my own accord because I wanted to spend more time at home with the family.
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
Ken777
Posts: 9020
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Fri Oct 01, 2010 9:11 pm

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 47):
So, what happened? The big hand of government has introduced uncertainty and introduced (and passed) legislation that has slowed or stopped the recovery. Plain and simple.

What happened? Lots of things.

The burst mortgage bubble didn't heal itself in a month or two.

The auto bailout has taken some time, but is getting better. (As an interesting side note, read Lee Iacocca's first book on government bailouts and the obscene, according to him, profits the government made.)

Confidence at the consumer level is down, except for a few companies that have a sharp focus on the consumer. Apple is at the top of my list in this area.

Because of consumer confidence business are replacing capital equipment, but are not focused on growth.

The political climate is nasty. Filled with hatred. Far from helping the country rebound - I consider it a hinderance to economic growth.

And I don't believe it is giong to get any better over the next 5 to 10 years.
 
NIKV69
Posts: 10889
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

RE: Obama On The Attack

Fri Oct 01, 2010 9:38 pm

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 48):
The auto bailout has taken some time, but is getting better. (As an interesting side note, read Lee Iacocca's first book on government bailouts and the obscene, according to him, profits the government made.)

Not for GM. Polls show people avoid them and would rather buy a Ford because Ford refused the money. It was getting in bed with the UAW. If GM couldn't have surviived let them die. They were run terribly, made a car nobody wanted and wouldn't make cuts because they wanted to pay for retirees health care forever. The UAW was horrible and if GM couldn't have stood up to them they shouldn't get anything.
Hey that guy with the private jet can bail us out! Why? HE CAN AFFORD IT!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: chepos and 17 guests