President Obama

Status
Not open for further replies.
jillio said:
And I freakin voted for him! What is up with that?
Click to expand...

Ungrateful fool. He shouldn't be plotting to kill his own voters.
 
I warned you all!

I told you guys that McCain and Obama deliberately set us up. That's why I didn't vote... if I could.
 
I'm sorry that my sidekick is slow loading to reply it.

Jillio - Ah, okay. Just make sure. Otherwise, I will feel disappoint if this thread get locked up for nothing. I would like to read/watch tv news, articles, and go on for exciting subjects. I'm kinda of tired of drama on Obama for long a time.

Cowpuppy - Why? Bush is history. I think it's strange if you don't want people critique Obama, yet want to critique Bush. I prefer to see no Bush-related posts in here. Can you kindly leave that way, please? :)

Secretblend - Why not? I don't mind. People may get tired of long critiquing on a president.

Okay, I'd better to get going now. I'll come back later when I get home.

:wave:
 
I don't mind people critique Obama. I have one myself. Problem is when they are biased and are actually 'out to get' the person. And areout to attack dem partyin any manner possible.
As regards former president...I explained that the camparison is what I find positive in regards to Obama.....I don't get the felling that he is spitting in my face....I think he respects the American people.
Clinton respected people..and Reagan...and Bush 1....and Carter, etc.


KarissaMann05 said:
I'm sorry that my sidekick is slow loading to reply it.

Jillio - Ah, okay. Just make sure. Otherwise, I will feel disappoint if this thread get locked up for nothing. I would like to read/watch tv news, articles, and go on for exciting subjects. I'm kinda of tired of drama on Obama for long a time.

Cowpuppy - Why? Bush is history. I think it's strange if you don't want people critique Obama, yet want to critique Bush. I prefer to see no Bush-related posts in here. Can you kindly leave that way, please? :)

Secretblend - Why not? I don't mind. People may get tired of long critiquing on a president.

Okay, I'd better to get going now. I'll come back later when I get home.

:wave:
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Hmm, tell women to postpone their mammogram and cervical check=ups much, much later. That'll get them on his side. Must be a misogynist in the WH.
 
Edited post....first paragraph.
And logged in so as to not be able to read Mr. Biased's comment.


Cowpuppy said:
I don't mind people critique Obama. I have one myself. Problem is when they are biased and are actually 'out to get' the person. And are out to attack dem party in any manner possible.
As regards former president...I explained that the camparison is what I find positive in regards to Obama.....I don't get the felling that he is spitting in my face....I think he respects the American people.
Clinton respected people..and Reagan...and Bush 1....and Carter, etc.
Click to expand...
 
Thank you again for letting us know that 'you know that the moniker 'Mr. Bias' refers to you'.
It means you know in your heart that you are a biased person.
A biased person disregards intellectual thought.
Biased thoughts don't amount to a hill of beans. This is why you are always trying to turn topics into a discussion of your so called acedemics. You are insecure about your intelligence.
End of story.
 
So, ignoring $1.4 trillion dollar deficit that's 5 times Bush's own spending deficit over his last 4 years isn't biased? Not to mention the uncanny ability in sticking one's head in the sand thinking nothing's wrong with that? Come back to me about this "intelligence" of yours again by those who think there's nothing wrong spending into oblivion.
 
kokonut said:
Hmm, tell women to postpone their mammogram and cervical check=ups much, much later. That'll get them on his side. Must be a misogynist in the WH.
Click to expand...

You can see that your wife receive mammograms and paps smears at any interval you choose. The recommendation is not of Obama's making. It is based on scientific medical research indicating that the need is not as frequent as once was believed. There are also side effects to unnecessary testing that should be avoided if one is to protect one's health and be a responsible consumer of health care services.

You show over and over again that your claim to have a background in research is a false one, as your numerous comments show that you have virtually no understanding of the research process or the conclusions that are reached through such.

You do whatever you think you need to do to take care of your spouse's cervix and mammary glands. Quite frankly, mine, nor any other woman's is any of your business. And your faked concern over women's health issues is not only patronizing, it is insulting to all women. Just another ploy to find a negative.
 
Mr. Bias....on the one hand...you don't want a health care plan because of expense. On the other hand you will put a spin on any attempt to actually create a responsible spending health plan.
You are against national plan.....and yet you are pretending to care about women's health.
Can't have it both ways pal.
Spin. So obvious.
You gotta have some unrelated issues unresolved. Transferring.
 
a positive post for you, Karissa

Obama's 'Mistakes': Way Too Early to Judge
Over the past few weeks, Barack Obama has been criticized for the following: He didn't go to Berlin for the 20th anniversary of the Wall's coming down. He didn't make a forceful enough statement on the 30th anniversary of the U.S. diplomats' being taken hostage in Iran. He didn't show sufficient mournfulness, at first, when the Fort Hood shootings took place, and he was namby-pamby about the possibility that the shootings were an act of jihad. He has spent too little time focusing on unemployment. He bowed too deeply before the Japanese Emperor. He allowed the Chinese to block the broadcast of his Shanghai town-hall meeting. He allowed the Chinese President to bar questions at their joint press conference (a moment memorably satirized by Saturday Night Live). He didn't come back with any diplomatic victories from Asia. He allowed Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the other 9/11 plotters to be tried in the U.S. criminal-justice system rather than by the military. He has dithered too long on Afghanistan. He has devoted too much attention to — and given congressional Democrats too much control over — health care reform, an issue that is peripheral to a majority of Americans.

And all this has led to a dangerous slippage in the polls, it is said, a sense that his presidential authority is ebbing. (See who's who in Barack Obama's White House.)

As a fully licensed pundit, I have the authority to weigh in here ... but I demur. Oh, I could sling opinions about every one of the events cited above — some were unfortunate — but it would matter only if I could discern a pattern that illuminates Obama's presidency. The most obvious pattern, however, is the media's tendency to get overwrought about almost anything. Why, for example, is the 20th anniversary of the Berlin Wall demolition so crucial that it requires a President's presence? Which recent U.S. President has gotten the Chinese to agree to anything big? (In fact, Obama has secured significant diplomatic cooperation from the Chinese on North Korea, Afghanistan and Pakistan.) Was his deep bow indicative of anything other than his physical fitness? (My midsection, sadly, prevents the appearance of obsequiousness in such circumstances.)

Stepping back a bit, I do see a metapattern that extends over the 40 years since Richard Nixon's Southern strategy began the drift toward more ideological political parties: Democrats have tough first years in the presidency. Of the past seven Presidents, the two Bushes rank at the top in popularity after one year, while Obama and Bill Clinton rank at the bottom, with Jimmy Carter close by. There is a reason for that. Democrats come to office eager to govern the heck out of the country. They take on impossible issues, like budget-balancing and health care reform. They run into roadblocks — from their own unruly ranks as well as from Republicans. They get lost in the details. A tax cut is much easier to explain than a tax increase. A foreign policy based in bluster — railing against an "axis of evil" — is easier to sell than a foreign policy based in nuance. Of course, external events count a lot: the ratings of Bushes I and II were bolstered, respectively, by the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the flattening of the World Trade Center. Reagan's rating — 53% and headed south — was dampened by a deepening recession. (See TIME's Person of the Year: Barack Obama.)

So it is way too early to make pronouncements on Obama's fate. One pattern that can be limned from the recent overseas controversies is that this President has a tendency to err in the direction of respect toward other countries. This is a witting reaction to the Bush Administration's tendency to diss our allies and insult — or invade — our enemies. It is a long game, which will yield results, or not, over time. After a first year spent demonstrating a new comity, Obama has gained the global credibility to get tough — on Iran, for example — in his second year. But the real evaluation of Obama's debut must wait for the results of the two biggest problems he's tackling: his decision on Afghanistan and the congressional attempt to pass health care reform. And even here, it will be difficult to render judgment immediately — as difficult as it was to judge Clinton's decision to spend his political capital on deficit reduction in his 1993 economic plan, a triumph that didn't become apparent for nearly five years.

The one Asian image that resonates with me isn't the bow, but the President alone on the Great Wall. That image — the noble loner — is clearly one the White House wants to project. But it raises the specter of isolation. Most Presidents have a significant other when it comes to policy. Bush Junior had Cheney; Clinton had Hillary; Bush the Elder had James Baker; Nixon had Kissinger. Obama's conservative critics poke fun at his overweening ego, but I suspect that the President's need to find an alter ego, an intellectual equal — in addition to the First Lady — who can challenge his decisions and demeanor (in private, with the bark off), is the biggest adjustment he has to make now.

wall_1525096c.jpg
Click to expand...

:)
 
Now that is spoken as a true pundit...not one who has given himself that label where it doesn't fit.:cool2:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top