CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Except the issue here isn't the supporters perse - it's the actual President himself who is doing the whining and blaming. He's acting like a spoiled child with his whining.
Except the issue here isn't the supporters perse - it's the actual President himself who is doing the whining and blaming. He's acting like a spoiled child with his whining.
I know republicans are being a righteous pain in the ass, but if the president can't convince a single republican to agree with him, how's he doing to negotiate with North Korea or Iran?
Ozoned
Diamond Member
- Mar 22, 2004
- 5,578
- 0
- 0
In a normal changing of the guard cycle, it would have be Dems against Republicans, with the president directing.
What we got here now is Republicans against Obama, with the presidents advisors directing.
Who made that happen???
Ozoned
Diamond Member
- Mar 22, 2004
- 5,578
- 0
- 0
Why would you tell anybody that it isn't your fault unless you really believe that there was absolutely nothing you could have done about it ???
well these three things are kind of Bush's fault. At least he made them happen. For lack of better words, I am quite sure even Bush does not wish these things upon this country. Anyhow, it is true all three are very tough problems that Obama is trying to solve. Your frustration is pretty much shared by the rest of us but I think we are in a bind right now. You need to pump some money to hold up the economy or it will bottom out, as to how much and where, of course both the blue/red side will differ but remember that even Bush pumped a ton of recovery money into the economy just before he left office at the expense of deficit. The war I'm no expert, I don't even know what they actually is doing behind the scene there. Whatever it is they won't tell me it's probably classified.
I can tell that you are frustrusted as do I, but to expect these things to be fixed right away is probably going to cause you even more frustration. You can put anyone there right now, I don't care it's Obama/MaCain/Palin/Hunkerbee/Pope/Dalai Lama/God ... ok maybe God, but any mere mortal I don't expect these things to be fixed so quickly.
Rest assured neither the great depression nor WW2 killed this country neither will the financial problems now nor the two wars we are currently in. That much I am sure about.
Last edited:
JEDIYoda
Lifer
- Jul 13, 2005
- 33,986
- 3,321
- 126
What`s ignorant is your obvious trolling......
Somebody else said it very well--kage69 said---
I find many of these points to be completely without merit, simply because I watched and listened to Bush supporters blame Clinton for almost everything for Bush's first 6 to 7 years. On top of that, 8 years under that admin gave this country very little. Those who questioned the White House on the war, taxes, etc had their patriotism questioned and their intellect ridiculed.
So Obama wins, and immediately the hacks proclaim the previous president and his policies to be off limits to discussion. Any mention of Bush is automatically met with a flatulent retort of "B B But Bush!!!" On top of that, Obama is somehow expected to deliver more in one year than Bush did in eight.
I think Obama critics are jumping the gun in a big way, showing a lot of gall while holding up their partisan double-standard for all to see. Makes them look like petulant children really. Behavior they accepted from Bush is now the latest affront from Obama and oh my god the whole country is going to burn! Reparations! Muslim socialist! Blah blah blah..
When Bush was in office and his critics complained, a common sentiment among his supporters was "Well we tried it your way for awhile, the election says we're going to try something different now. Don't like it? Then vote at the next election."
Guess what? Time to live up to your own advice.
You guys will have something to bitch about when Obama violates his oath of office a la Bush, or decides to throw away American blood and money on some elective military adventure. Till then, you would do well to temper your current opinions with some contemplation over the ones you've made in the past.
kage69
Lifer
- Jul 17, 2003
- 31,742
- 48,567
- 136
That's because we're talking about GWB, who doesn't really keep tabs on or research... well, anything really. Fishing and baseball should probably get an exception there I suppose, he has shown an aptitude and fluency with those endeavors, but remember this is a politician who made it into his fifties without knowing what a State of The Union address was. His detachment from what he's told to say is so palpable sometimes it's hilarious. Like a dutiful (R) drone, he criticized Clinton getting into the Balkans without an exit strategy, then later invaded Iraq...without an exit strategy. As a presidential candidate he didn't know the difference between Medicare and Medicaid. Sorry, but I don't give Bush credit for having zero input. It's what he does to appear classy, but it also saves him from having to say anything substantial or relevant. His handlers knew what they were doing. I know when he keeps his mouth shut some conservatives are happy just to avoid the embarrassment, but I see it as an opportunity for the PoTUS to prove to listeners why he's the one calling the shots. Show me you know what's going on Repeating talking points and other canned rhetoric doesn't fulfill that need. I will not fault Obama for acknowledging the 800lb gorilla in the room. Maybe if we draw more attention to bad presidents we won't have so many bad presidents.
Really, that's the only issue?
Well that's a matter of perception isn't it? You see pride, others see satisfaction in taking that extra step. But these times, they are 'achangin. Did you hear Cheney, Mr. You Don't Reveal the Making of Sausage is writing a book of his own?! It's like some people only care about rules when it suits them, huh. Big deal. In the end it pales in comparison to real rules being broken. Revealing CIA identities, for instance. Or perhaps wiretapping on American citizens without warrants. Or perhaps fulfilling a military obligation you swore to uphold...How funny is it that if we were to really go by these "old gentleman's" rules in the first place, we wouldn't be discussing a half-black President to begin with.
Last edited:
umbrella39
Lifer
- Jun 11, 2004
- 13,816
- 1,126
- 126
This notion that we are supposed to have collective amnesia about the context in which a President takes office is illogical and frankly retarded. I notice it was OK in another thread to point out that Obama cannot take credit for pulling out of Iraq because that had already been agreed to be by Bush. So we can give Bush credit for something Obama is doing right now but Obama must take all the blame for the recession and deficit. Brilliant.
Obama isn't really that interested in blaming Bush. He is actually interested in defending his record. For those who are tired of all the "Bush blaming," there is an easy remedy for it. Once people stop pretending that the recession that was in place when he took office was something that could have been solved in 12 months, start realizing that the deficit expansion under his watch was directly tied to that recession, and start showing a little patience for these problems being solved, then there is no need to bring up the past. The "blame Bush" phenomenon is a reaction to actions taken by his political opponents. If the notion is we can throw stones but don't throw any stones back at our glass houses, then I say grow the fuck up and deal with the consequences of your own rhetoric.
- wolf
Obama isn't really that interested in blaming Bush. He is actually interested in defending his record. For those who are tired of all the "Bush blaming," there is an easy remedy for it. Once people stop pretending that the recession that was in place when he took office was something that could have been solved in 12 months, start realizing that the deficit expansion under his watch was directly tied to that recession, and start showing a little patience for these problems being solved, then there is no need to bring up the past. The "blame Bush" phenomenon is a reaction to actions taken by his political opponents. If the notion is we can throw stones but don't throw any stones back at our glass houses, then I say grow the fuck up and deal with the consequences of your own rhetoric.
- wolf
kage69
Lifer
- Jul 17, 2003
- 31,742
- 48,567
- 136
I think Obama lost a bit of his cool, yes, but I also feel that his frustration is justified in many cases. But regardless, even if he was, since when did you guys care about the PoTUS acting like a child? Don't make me pummel you with youtube links.
Obama is pissed. He gave the GOP more attention and respect than it was due given how the Dems were slapped around and ignored 2002-2006. The Repub response was to push the fillibuster record to new heights. Yes a minority can disagree with proposed policies, but prefacing everything with "NO" isn't the way it's supposed to work with this system. The GOP is doing exactly what it accused the Dems of doing years ago. Sounds frustrating for a Dem. A more accurate way to describe it all is that it's his name and legacy that pay the price for the GOP acting like spoiled children. Obama is acting quite the adult I'd say, he just did that thing in Baltimore didn't he? That's the spirit of maturity and cooperation right there, a marked departure from some of Cheney/Bush imperial, unitary executive style of engaging political opponents.
Last edited:
Ozoned
Diamond Member
- Mar 22, 2004
- 5,578
- 0
- 0
This shit has been going back and forth for over 200 years. Tell me how it is supposed to work when a minority wants to stop the agenda of a majority that is not doing what it said it was going to do?
EXman
Lifer
- Jul 12, 2001
- 20,079
- 15
- 81
I disagree. It is not the most idiotic post, but it sure ranks up there.
Completely agree on one of the main problems though. The Republicans are like a guy who says a boat sucks, puts a hole in it, it sinks, and then yells "See, I told you so!"
His post is also quite Ironic, being that again the attempt is made to ignore the Obama inherited all the issues the OP claims are Obama's alone. They(probably himself as well) started blaming him before he was even inaugurated. Someone elses fault indeed.
What do you all thinks Dems did pre 2006? Please don't go here. The Republicans were stupid to think they were invulnerable and lost touch with America. You all taught the R's how to be obstructionist. Do you remember any number of Judges couldn't even get up or down vote.
Please people in glass houses should not throw stones. Anyhow you had a Super Majority in the senate and dominate the House and how did you win them? On Ideas? Nope by Claiming you were not Bush and a guy with a message and buzzwords like "HOPE and Change" but still relied on the fact that he wasn't Bush as well. He promised things like:
Transparancy
Negotiate health care reform in public sessions televised on C-SPAN
Close Gitmo
Get out of Iraq because we were losing (yes which evolved to just getting out)
Tax cuts for everyone but for Millionaires how make less than 300k, then 250k then 200k...
Free healthcare and that you'd be able to keep the doctor you had now.
End No bid contracts
Allow five days of public comment before signing bills
Tougher rules against revolving door for lobbyists and former officials
Create a $3,000 tax credit for companies that add jobs
Reduce earmarks to 1994 levels
Allow bankruptcy judges to modify terms of a home mortgage
Urge states to treat same-sex couples with full equality in their family and adoption laws
My Favorite Create 5,000,000 green jobs
Somehow that is ALL or even mostly the Republicans fault?
C'mon even many Democrats are pissed on how little he's done, accomplished or barely even worked on. Isn't the Obama Girl even jumping ship? OMG!
Individual examples are not a good way to make a point. I suggest you review the aggregate history of the use of the fillibuster and how it correlates to why is in the majority versus the minority.
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/03/31/republican-filibusters-skyrocket/
- wolf
Obama has to defend himself, Bush was the worst president in the history of this country.
Are people so delusional that they think there is a clean slate after you inherit the policies of the WORST PRESIDENT EVER????
Are people so delusional that they think there is a clean slate after you inherit the policies of the WORST PRESIDENT EVER????
kage69
Lifer
- Jul 17, 2003
- 31,742
- 48,567
- 136
You debase and over simplify the issue by stating that the minority's complaint lies with the opposition "not doing what it said it was going to do," while at the same point prove you have a feeble understanding of the history behind the filibuster. In short, "this shit" has changed considerably over 200 years, but to address your main point - compromise and communication are what is called for, not purposefully avoiding discussion and votes.
I don't see Dems barricading themselves into their offices with furniture to resist the Sgt at Arms physically relocating them to chambers in session.
sandorski
No Lifer
- Oct 10, 1999
- 70,874
- 6,411
- 126
sandorski
No Lifer
- Oct 10, 1999
- 70,874
- 6,411
- 126
It seems they think so. I'd like to point out that Obama didn't Blame Bush, he merely stated the truth of what he inherited when he took Office.
Starbuck1975
Lifer
- Jan 6, 2005
- 14,698
- 1,909
- 126
I recall people questioning Clinton's character, or challenging the notion that he was an exceptional President. I also recall both Democrats and Republicans staking claim to the prosperity of the 90s, with neither really having the justification to do so. I recall Republicans criticizing Clinton for downsizing the military while over extending it across the Balkans. I recall Republicans criticizing Clinton for cutting and running from Somalia when the heat got too intense. I recall Republicans making the case that Clinton's failed foreign policy in the Middle East, and his Administration's seemingly blind eye towards the rise of Al Quaida, as being partially to blame for 9/11. Some of those criticisms of Clinton were valid, others were not. I do not recall Bush overtly blaming Clinton for his own mistakes.
I don't know about intellect, but I would question the integrity of any politician who chooses to challenge the President once it became politically convenient to do so.
No disrespect, but the typical Obama supporter response is to deflect and blame Bush. The measure of Obama's leadership is to tackle the very challenges for which he campaigned under the pretense of having solutions.
Don't you think it is a natural part of the political process for the minority party to challenge the majority? It is easy to be more forgiving towards leaders that share your ideological view of the world. Many of Bush's most vocal critics on this forum are far more forgiving of Obama for exhibiting similar behaviors.
Hasn't that been Pelosi's position since getting to sit in the big chair.
Perhaps you should contemplate following your own advice.
Naturally you don't understand because you are an asshole. You and the right wing so called conservatives like you who through your incredible imbecility and ignorant backwardness, voted in the party of death and gave it 8 years to destroy the nation, owing again to your titanic stupidity, can't distinguish between what is factual, that YOU are at root cause for the destruction of our nation, and your childish, peevish, and egotistically blind emotional reaction to having light shown on that fact.
But then, like any alcoholic or drug addict bent on self destruction, nobody expects anything from you but complete and total denial. You wouldn't be the total moron you are otherwise.
I hate to say this. I really do. But Barack Obama is like the stereotypical blackman. He blames everybody else for his failings. After having a supermajority in Congress and the House, the guy lets Congress lead him. Bush tried and succeeded in grabbing a lot of power from Congress and Obama just hands it back to those fools. What a fucking idiot.
sandorski
No Lifer
- Oct 10, 1999
- 70,874
- 6,411
- 126
Uhh sure, you really hated to say that.
I also really believe that Obama is naive. He thinks the world is inherently good. He thinks people play by the rules. He thinks there is order. He believes that everyone is civilized.
But when reality humiliates, slaps, kicks, punches and impales him, he's quick to blame somebody else for his problems. The president should just resign if he doesn't understand what it means to be a leader. Let somebody else take over.
EDIT: People were right when they talked about there not being any 'on the job' training for POTUS. They were fucking right.
Last edited:
The world is inherently good. You would know that had you not been made to feel like a worthless piece of shit. And no worthless piece of shit has any idea what it means to be leader, although they imagine they do. Why, in the feelings one would be a worthless piece of shit if one didn't know what a leader is, no? The fact that you know nothing would be too much for your ego to take.
How does it feel to be so smug in your conviction that you are better than everyone else yet have a bed next to the boiler?
sandorski
No Lifer
- Oct 10, 1999
- 70,874
- 6,411
- 126
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter