View Full Version : Barack Obama Officially Announces He's Running In 2012
Mustang Man
04-04-2011, 11:22
http://gothamist.com/2011/04/04/barack_obama_officially_announces_h.php
President Barack Obama has kicked off his 2012 effort with a campaign video (see below) posted on his website that encourages people to help get out the vote, in hopes of recapturing the grassroots fervor that helped him get elected in 2008. Obama doesn't appear in the video, but many of his supporters do, and one says, "President Obama is one person...Plus he's got a job. We're paying to do a job so we can't ask him to take some time off to get us all energized so we better figure it out."
Politico reports, "An official filing with the Federal Election Commission is expected to come Monday so that Obama can begin fundraising for his campaign. His first official fundraiser is scheduled for April 14 in his hometown of Chicago. Two more are set for the following week, in San Francisco and Los Angeles, with ticket prices ranging from $25 for young adults — “Gen44” — to $2,500 for VIPs." Politico also notes Obama's email message from this morning to supporters:
“We’re doing this now because the politics we believe in does not start with expensive TV ads or extravaganzas, but with you — with people organizing block-by-block, talking to neighbors, co-workers, and friends,” he says, explaining why the launch is coming more than 19 months before Election Day. “And that kind of campaign takes time to build.”
“So even though I’m focused on the job you elected me to do, and the race may not reach full speed for a year or more, the work of laying the foundation for our campaign must start today,” Obama continues in the written message. That includes fundraising for what could be the first-ever $1 billion campaign.
The Caucus points out that unlike his change message in 2008, "Now, Mr. Obama must defend his own unpopular wars, an economic recovery that remains fragile, fiscal policies that have drawn skeptics and energy policies that have stalled in the face of natural and manmade disasters. And most of all, the president must find a way to explain how he made good on promises to change the way Washington conducts itself in spite of a brutally divisive health care fight and an ongoing budget standoff that appears to have bogged down in the same politics that Mr. Obama decried as a candidate in 2008."
This is a change we can definitely believe in. Unemployment is definitely a big change...maybe we'll get more of that.
silly me...
...I thought he had started his 2012 campaign on 21 January of 2009
AngelsSix
04-04-2011, 15:50
Even scarier is the 56.43% (136 people) that said that will vote for him in 2012. That just astounds me.
Even scarier is the 56.43% (136 people) that said that will vote for him in 2012
...and even MORE scarier is that he only needs 51% to win
Red Flag 1
04-04-2011, 18:31
...and even MORE scarier is that he only needs 51% to win
No help from Acorn this time:rolleyes:.
RF1
slickman777
04-04-2011, 19:05
i think that we are not recognizing progress when we see it. this is possibly the first time our supreme commander has saved we lowly tax payers money.... by not appearing in his own friggin commercial.
-gun control is staying on target.
Originally posted by Red Flag 1:
No help from Acorn this time.
He might also receive less help from his celebrity friends. They do not seem too happy with him at the moment. It seems they feel that he is not as left-leaning as they thought. :boohoo
http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_theticket/20110303/pl_yblog_theticket/matt-damon-joins-the-growing-list-of-celebrities-unhappy-with-president-obamaa
And projections are through the roof when considering how much they are thinking of spending for the upcoming election.
“Former West Wing staffer Jim Messina, Obama’s likely campaign manager, has been holding donor meetings around the country, and the president is scheduled to hold a series of fundraisers in New York and California over the next few weeks,” reports Politico.com. “The campaign is expected to raise $750 million to $1 billion.”
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2011/0403/Obama-about-to-launch-his-reelection-campaign.-It-could-cost-1-billion
Can they not find something else to do with all of that money?
Even scarier is the 56.43% (136 people) that said that will vote for him in 2012. That just astounds me.
The 3 kinds of lies: Lies, damn lies, and statistics.
No help from Acorn this time
Watch. The pinhead is from Chicago. ACORN will revive itself wearing a Union Label.
And yet the Right has zero to offer, so I guess we are all hoping and wishing at this point in time.
Obama is on his way for a 2nd term because the GOP cannot look into the future and come up with a plan.
They do know what to tell the American people what to be against, but they cannot lead this nation any better than this POTUS.
While I will do everything I can to toss this guy on his ass by casting my free and independant vote, I am bracing myself for another 4 years.
But do not forget, more can happen in a few hours that changes the course of any pre-conceived agenda.
7 Dec 1941
9-11-2001
(next????)
I can think of 5 people who would be great as president, but none of them would take the job.
o.k., maybe two......
greenberetTFS
04-09-2011, 14:23
Question. Is it possible to destroy America in 3 years? A lot of you Obama "haters?" seem to think he destroyed the country. Are you guys blaming him personally? Or just blaming him because he is in charge?
Answers: Yes,Yes and Both!.............:mad::mad::mad:
Big Teddy :munchin
Question. Is it possible to destroy America in 3 years? A lot of you Obama haters seem to think he destroyed the country. Are you guys blaming him personally? Or just blaming him because he is in charge?
And... a lot of us Gals, too. :rolleyes:
Is "He" in charge? Hmmm, makes me wonder. "Who-Sane" seems to be following his agenda very closely:
1. Bring about real change= Destroy the economy first.
2. Bow to Dictators= Destroy the trust second.
3. Enact rediculous laws that bring about communism & Islamic Tolerence=
BANG! We Are Dead.:mad:
And your question was what??? Get a clue man, seriously.
Thankfully, there are still Real Americans who can call a spade a spade.
Holly
Question. Is it possible to destroy America in 3 years? A lot of you Obama haters seem to think he destroyed the country. Are you guys blaming him personally? Or just blaming him because he is in charge?
Yes.
Don't hate him, I just think he's an ass, an idiot, and could not think his way off of dangerous ground.
No, not personally, we began this sliding slope of falling many years ago, but he keeps greasing the rails.
I blame everyone who put him in office and most importantly, the Hollywood suck heads who supported him and the grassroot, punch drinking, door to door HS kids who thought he would make "Change". Well they got that part right, things have changed. He is in charge, for the moment.
Not that I haven't seen a few governments fall in my time.
Seems Oprah has also recently pulled her support of her favorite president, wow, what commitment!
incarcerated
04-09-2011, 15:10
Question. Is it possible to destroy America in 3 years? A lot of you Obama haters seem to think he destroyed the country. Are you guys blaming him personally? Or just blaming him because he is in charge?
Nice stereotype.
Care to be more specific?
Please refer me to the posts in which ‘we’ claimed that Obama destroyed the country.
On the first page someone said he was running the country into the ground. So he is destroying the country.
This must be a joke right? Are you Lord whatthefuckever, honestly saying that? This must be a joke, right?.....:munchin
Back onto the thread topic, Obama must think running for election is more importan t than running America, IMHO. Can we please bring back Regan?
Holly
I like to see what he will try to fix this year??
All of those people in the Military and Veterans that voted for him have be doing some thinking this week.
silly me...
...I thought he had started his 2012 campaign on 21 January of 2009
Makes two of us.
On the first page someone said he was running the country into the ground. So he is destroying the country.
Every chance he gets. Perhaps you should present your arguments as to why he is not, since there are plenty of posts which reflect the mindset of many folks here when it comes to the current president. Or maybe you just enjoy stirring the pot...
Question. Is it possible to destroy America in 3 years? A lot of you Obama haters seem to think he destroyed the country. Are you guys blaming him personally? Or just blaming him because he is in charge?
Don't criticize peoples opinions. Argue with them, fine. Calling everyone a Obama Hater, not an argument.
He is the most inexperienced modern day president we have had. It shows every day. For example. How aloof he is when making a decision
olhamada
04-10-2011, 20:04
On the first page someone said he was running the country into the ground. So he is destroying the country.
You mean like a Kenyan born Muslim Manchurian candidate? :eek::D
How much you wanna bet, that in 2012, we'll be calling Trump, "President"?
On foreign policy, he is too much of a "global" president for me. He acts like America is just one country among many other equals, as opposed to the world leader.
IMO this is one of his best qualities. The thought of conventional "boots on the ground" in Syria, Yemen, Egypt, Libya, and Tunisia simultaneously gives me pause. I think we've dodged quite a few bullets recently thanks to the POTUS' 'indecisiveness.'
I was pleased to see Senator Mitt Romney throw his name into the hat. I am eager to see what kind of reasonable fixes he will campaign for. IMO it's going to be rough going for the elephants if they can't get a united front against the incumbent.
I don't hate him, I just think he is an idiot and does not need to be re-elected. My reasons are many. A few are:
1. Birthing controversy aside, I don't believe he is qualified by any means.
2. Since he has been POTUS, the number of bureaucrats making over $150K has doubled, most in the D.C. area.
3. Since Jan '09, $670B in tax increases and he is the first to want to bring up new taxes this year.
4. His insitency to keep "Holy Grail" social programs at the expense of defense, law enforcement, infrastructure and other programs that are truly necessary.
5. Kowtowing to foreign dignitaries!
6. Failure to take the border/illegal immigration issue seriously and allowing the Justice Department to actually sue a sovereign state.
7. Obamacare! Nuff said about that.
I could continue but that should be sufficient.
I am not criticizing anything. I was just searching for opinions and answers. What makes a good President? And isn't every President in his first term inexperienced?
No. Most presidents have had some executive experience. Even Palin had it. That means making a decision. It also means being able to gather people to your staff who are experienced - so they can give you their opinion - and then you make a decision.
A lot of ex governors become presidents - not too many senators. We are paying for that now. The prez is a politician and has surrounded himself with election campaign type people - yes men for him - an echo chamber so to say.
I don't hate him, I just think he is an idiot and does not need to be re-elected. My reasons are many. A few are:
1. Birthing controversy aside, I don't believe he is qualified by any means.
2. Since he has been POTUS, the number of bureaucrats making over $150K has doubled, most in the D.C. area.
3. Since Jan '09, $670B in tax increases and he is the first to want to bring up new taxes this year.
4. His insitency to keep "Holy Grail" social programs at the expense of defense, law enforcement, infrastructure and other programs that are truly necessary.
5. Kowtowing to foreign dignitaries!
6. Failure to take the border/illegal immigration issue seriously and allowing the Justice Department to actually sue a sovereign state.
7. Obamacare! Nuff said about that.
I could continue but that should be sufficient.
Very well articulated Sir.
It seems to me that most of those who are, "on the fence" as to the dire reality our great Nation faces, are not criticizing anything, but just searching for opinions and answers. :rolleyes:
"If you don't stand for something, you will fall for anything," comes to mind.
Holly:munchin
Promise - Create a foreclosure prevention fund for homeowners
Promise - Close the Guantanamo Bay Detention Center
Promise - “If American workers are being denied their right to organize when I'm in the White House, I will put on a comfortable pair of shoes and I will walk on that picket line with you as president of the United States."
Promise - Support repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA)
Promise - Forbid companies in bankruptcy from giving executives bonuses
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/browse/
The only one of the few promises in this list that he actually succeeded on keeping so far is highlighted in a flamboyant color.
I remember the first one leading to a huge 'bailout' bill that never actually went to the homeowners.
I don't think we can borrow enough money from China to finance this...President for another 4 year spending spree.
Respectfully
What makes a good President? IMO, skill and luck. The incumbent's lack of the former is compounding the absence of the latter.
His response was indeed very well articulated. I liked it a lot actually and It shows that I need pay more attention to politics. As for you i am disapoint.
sir,
IMHO, nope!
Politics are focused on by a ton of folks in this Country, some for personal gain, some for political gain, some for emotional gain...(very sad indeed.) However, no dissapointment here, as I do not focus on politics, as my posts here on PS can attest.
I try and steer clear of the Soapbox forum, as it is just a headache for me personally, and far more intelligent folks can debate the real reasons...politically.
Personally my belief is that skill and luck have nothing to do with it, just the stupidity of some Americans, and their LAZINESS. That is what I attest our current Presidents title too.
Those who voted for him...were very, very lazy.:munchin
Holly
Holly
What makes a good President?
The measuring bar has changed, but I'd take someone who has labored by his own strength to build fortune and opportunities for himself and others.
One also with proven executive experience.
I can think of several jobs that are by far much more difficult then that of president or senator. School teacher, police officer, firefighter are three vocations with verticals that have uper executive rolls at district, state and federal levels.
I'd take a multi national energy executive with banking/bond experience or a rurual telephone company executive responsible in making payroll for 5,000 direct employees, a timber lumber manager, a rancher, the director of a port authority. An economist, a child hospital administrator, or the guy down the street.
The greatest leaders this country has ever had have come from its ranks, those closely connected to its citizens, approachable, average, common.
In our simularities, we maintain our core.
Politics are focused on by a ton of folks in this Country, some for personal gain, some for political gain, some for emotional gain...(very sad indeed.)
Personally my belief is that skill and luck have nothing to do with it, just the stupidity of some Americans, and their LAZINESS. That is what I attest our current Presidents title too.
Those who voted for him...were very, very lazy.:munchin
Holly
IMVHO your Absofuckinlutly 100% correct and said it alot more tactful than I would have.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOZ-Etb0k0Q&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI&feature=related
drymartini66
04-14-2011, 17:51
Obama runnig again? I feel safer already.
The measuring bar has changed, but I'd take someone who has labored by his own strength to build fortune and opportunities for himself and others.
One also with proven executive experience.
I can think of several jobs that are by far much more difficult then that of president or senator. School teacher, police officer, firefighter are three vocations with verticals that have uper executive rolls at district, state and federal levels.
I'd take a multi national energy executive with banking/bond experience or a rurual telephone company executive responsible in making payroll for 5,000 direct employees, a timber lumber manager, a rancher, the director of a port authority. An economist, a child hospital administrator, or the guy down the street.
The greatest leaders this country has ever had have come from its ranks, those closely connected to its citizens, approachable, average, common.
In our simularities, we maintain our core.
This got me to thinking and I decided to do a little looking. I was surprised at what I found. The VAST majority of our past presidents have been lawyers. Some with or without military experience. This is the breakdown:
1. George Washington - Planter , Soldier
2. John Adams - Lawyer
3. Thomas Jefferson - Lawyer
4. James Madison - Lawyer
5. James Monroe - Lawyer
6. John Quincy Adams - Lawyer
7. Andrew Jackson - Lawyer , Soldier
8. Martin Van Buren - Lawyer
9. William Henry Harrison - Soldier
10. John Tyler - Lawyer
11. James Polk - Lawyer
12. Zachary Taylor - Soldier
13. Millard Fillmore - Lawyer
14. Franklin Pierce - Lawyer, public official
15. James Buchanan - Lawyer
16. Abe Lincoln - Lawyer
17. Andrew Johnson - Tailor, public official
18. Ulysses S. Grant - Soldier
19. Rutherford B. Hayes - Lawyer
20. James Garfield - Teacher, public official
21. Chester Arthur - Lawyer
22/24. Grover Cleveland - Lawyer
23. Benjamin Harrison - Lawyer
25. William McKinley - Lawyer
26. Theodore Roosevelt - Author, Soldier/Hunter, Lawyer, public official
27. William Howard Taft - Lawyer, public official
28. Woodrow Wilson - Teacher, public official
29. Warren G. Harding - Editor/Publisher
30. Calvin Coolidge - Lawyer
31. Herbert Hoover - Engineer
32. Franklin D. Roosevelt - Lawyer, public official
33. Harry Truman - Farmer, Soldier, public official
34. Dwight D. Eisenhower - Soldier
35. John F. Kennedy - Author, Sailor, public official
36. Lyndon B. Johnson - Teacher, public official
37. Richard Nixon - Lawyer, public official
38. Gerald Ford - Lawyer, public official
39. Jimmie Carter - Farmer, public official
40. Ronald Reagan - Actor, public official
41. George H.W. Bush - Businessman, public official
42. William J. Clinton - Lawyer, public official
43. George W. Bush - Businessman
44. BHO - Lawyer, community agitator
After reading the list, you can make your own assumptions. Of course on many of them where "public official" is listed equates to "Governor"; not all though. From reading history and memory from my life time, "Greatness" as a president had little to do with past occupational experience and more to do with personal and moral convictions. In my lifetime, JFK;Reagan; and GHW Bush would be good examples. From an historical perspective, the first seven; Lincoln; US Grant; Teddy Roosevelt; FDR (arguably); and Ike. Those are just my opinion of course. YMMV
Law school is rather a new concept. Years past, and I say recently, (1930's) Law Schools became required before the state bar exams. Before that, if one could speak as to the law, he had the job.
My grandfather, born 1903, interned as a lawyer in a local office working for the county commissioner, he was 18 years old.
Before he was 20, he was representing his own clients, depositions between land owners, canal companies, ranchers, miners, railroad engineers, surveyors and other business owners.
He never left ranching, or the rurual business communities of Wyoming, but represented many clients all through the 1950's, 60's and 70's who had business interests regionally, (Omaha, Salt Lake City, Pheonix, Denver). Ran for Public office, was elected as county commissioner, advised Gerry Spence on how to win some rather high profile cases.
When "insurance companies" first formed, they were nothing more than ship owners, financially backed by "states", (Spain, France, England) to ensure pirating activities would be "mitigated" and "reduced". Functioning to write law in order to pool potential losses.
Matthrew, Mark, Luke and John, (one banker-tax rep., one Lawyer, and two speach writer interns).
Have we gone so far down the path, that a LBJ looks good?
At least Teddy Roosevelt wore a .45 while in the office, shooting with G-men on the lawn during lunch breaks.
Have we gone so far down the path, that a LBJ looks good?If Robert Dallek, LBJ's foremost biographer, gets his way, Johnson will be remembered as one of America's greatest presidents.:confused:
When I heard Professor Dallek pitch this point back in the early 1990s, I damn near bit my tongue in half.
The Reaper
04-16-2011, 16:21
If Robert Dallek, LBJ's foremost biographer, gets his way, Johnson will be remembered as one of America's greatest presidents.:confused:
When I heard Professor Dallek pitch this point back in the early 1990s, I damn near bit my tongue in half.
Let's hope he doesn't get his way.
LBJ was a disgrace, and his mistakes continue to haunt us.
TR
He signed one of the most important pieces of legislation into law ever, the civil rights act
.....I don't need to tell you we were in vietnam before LBJ
....LBJ oversaw the first flight to the moon,
he established medicare,
medicaid,
work study programs,
food stamps
and wic for mothers with newborns who could not financially support themselves.
Sure some of those programs may seem socialist but at that period in time, it was what was best for the country. My major beefs with LBJ are in regard to his gun control views and him not committing more assets to the Vietnam War. We could have and should have won while LBJ was still in office.
These are excellent examples, but none of them had anything to do with LBJ.
JFK ran for president winning only because he locked up the black vote, which up to that time, was assured to be carried by a republican. It is easy to see why Dr. King was a republican, the democrats, deep seating southern KKK types kept a strong hold on old school southern habits and practices.
When MLK went to JFK in the summer of 62, pressuring him to move forward with the Civil Rights Act, JFK said, he, "would lose much of the white vote for a second election".
Women, education, religious freedoms, all touch points of JFK. LBJ simple cashed the check.
It was only because of JFK's death that LBJ got many of the executive orders passed, all signed into law, under "our fallen king" eulogy. The nation loved camelot, the Kennedy's and Jackie.
It was JFK that funded NASA saying, "inside of ten years we will have a man on the moon", racing with the USSR.
That's how I inturpret history being I was sucking my thumb during the assassination of our president.
My mother, a tough republican, loved John F Kennedy, considered LBJ the trigger man in his death, and appreciated Nixon for getting us out of Vietnam.
As for Vietnam War, we could have won that conflict in any two week period, but Politics had more to gain, and more money to earn in keeping in elongated.
The Reaper
04-16-2011, 17:23
I respect your opinion as you are a very educated person but to use the word disgrace towards LBJ is a bit out there in my humble opinion. He signed one of the most important pieces of legislation into law ever, the civil rights act. I don't need to tell you we were in vietnam before LBJ. LBJ oversaw the first flight to the moon, he established medicare, medicaid, work study programs, food stamps and wic for mothers with newborns who could not financially support themselves.
Sure some of those programs may seem socialist but at that period in time, it was what was best for the country. My major beefs with LBJ are in regard to his gun control views and him not committing more assets to the Vietnam War. We could have and should have won while LBJ was still in office.
I usually don't like to copy and paste but here is some major legislation he signed into law.
* 1963: Clean Air Act of 1963[98]
* 1963: Higher Education Facilities Act of 1963[99][100]
* 1963: Vocational Education Act of 1963[101]
* 1964: Civil Rights Act of 1964
* 1964: Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964
* 1964: Wilderness Act
* 1964: Nurse Training Act of 1964[102]
* 1964: Food Stamp Act of 1964
* 1964: Economic Opportunity Act
* 1964: Housing Act of 1964[103]
* 1965: Higher Education Act of 1965
* 1965: Older Americans Act
* 1965: Social Security Act of 1965
* 1965: Voting Rights Act
* 1965: Immigration and Nationality Services Act of 1965
* 1966: Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
* 1967: Age Discrimination in Employment Act[104]
* 1967: Public Broadcasting Act of 1967
* 1968: Architectural Barriers Act of 1968
* 1968: Bilingual Education Act
* 1968: Civil Rights Act of 1968
* 1968: Gun Control Act of 1968
And I also think Richard Nixon was a great President but thats totally off the subject at hand.
Johnson also screwed up the war in Vietnam and his personal conduct was reprehensible. He was a notorious liar, and a cheater.
Next thing I know, you will be mentioning his Silver Star. You should read the citation.
If you think welfare, food stamps, and the GCA were great legislation, I have nothing further to say to you.:rolleyes:
TR
incarcerated
04-16-2011, 17:34
I respect your opinion as you are a very educated person but to use the word disgrace towards LBJ is a bit out there in my humble opinion. He signed one of the most important pieces of legislation into law ever, the civil rights act.
Sure some of those programs may seem socialist but at that period in time, it was what was best for the country.
Thanks to your CRA ‘64, Kobe Bryant is paying a $100,000 fine for exercising his freedom of expression. The Civil Rights Acts have given us speech codes and unequal rights that are based on group membership. These group rights tend to trump the individual rights enumerated in the Constitution.
Please explain to me how Kobe Bryant’s loss of free speech is best for America.
PedOncoDoc
04-16-2011, 18:14
I was in Chicago Thursday and Friday. Apparently P-BO was also - the local news states he raised over $2 million at a couple campaigning dinner appearances Thursday evening, heading out Friday.
I find it hard to agree that programs that have effectively turned us into a welfare state and the gun control act of '68 can be described as "great ideas". I am not an educated man, perhaps one day someone can explain how it was just a glitch in bureaucracy that made these programs go south.
I have a pretty solid opinion that the great society of LBJ was fundamentally and ideologically flawed and not just a product of bureaucracy.
...just my two cents
The Reaper
04-16-2011, 19:32
They were great ideas but bureaucracy screwed up the system and it is now so misguided and abused its not even funny.
Well, please elaborate on how the GCA was a "great idea".
TR
incarcerated
04-16-2011, 20:16
What did Kobe Bryant say? I don't follow basketball at all.
They’re not saying. It was a slur of some kind, offensive to gays.
You answered my question (quite well) in your post #48. We do not disagree. PM inbound.
Thread hijack over.
In a perfect world socialism is a great idea.
Merriam-Webster definition of SOCIALISM:
1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2:
a - system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b - a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
This is a pefect world to you?
In theory?
Are you serious?
I will respectfully bow out of this thread since there is clearly no reason for me to continue any form of social communication with you.
Good day sir. Best wishes in all of your endeavors.
incarcerated
04-18-2011, 00:04
Read what Marx wrote. Respectfully Sir, I don't care about some sentence long definition.
Marx?
So how do you account for the track record of socialism in the 20th century?
In a perfect world socialism is a great idea. In a PERFECT WORLD. But we don't live in a perfect world and there will always be corruption thus socialism will not work the way marx intended it to.
What kind of nutjob would create an ideology that needs a “Perfect World” to function the way they intended it to?
Humankind isn’t perfect, never has been, never will be.
You would think Marx was smart enough to realize that……….or maybe he did..........hmmmmm.
Read what Marx wrote. Respectfully Sir, I don't care about some sentence long definition.When you say "read what Marx wrote," what do you mean? Are you referring to specific works or to the majority of his writings?
If, as you suggest, Marx was a proponent of socialism, then why did he and Engels hector socialists time and again in The German Ideology?
Are you certain that Marx viewed concepts such as "corruption" as constants? Or did he see such traits as situated within specific milieu of human history?
If LBJ should be credited for the transformation of American public policy during his presidency, why should he not also be held responsible for the consequences (unintended and otherwise) of the bills he signed into law?
I once viewed a socialist/communist experience first hand.
While returning from a 10 day patrol, we entered the camp to find a soldier bathing in the top hatch of the "water buffalo" tank. He was removed, beat down/stripped of his clothing, his property taken away, was left sitting beside the trailer, tied, unable to move, a sign hung around his neck that read, "I was caught swimming in the water tank".
The tank was scheduled to be picked up withing 24 hours, he was left sitting there, a bit sunburned with a fat lip, a bloody nose and one very painful black eye.
When our ODA was questioned, I folded under the pressure of a SERE school level interrogation. I said, "I wrote the sign", while placing his dog tags on the Cdr's desk.
What was learned was the soldier had been AWOL from his unit for several weeks. He was stealing MREs/water and other US Govt., equipment, (trucks, etc.), while his unit cdr, family and fellow soldiers thought him dead or missing.
Back to the original focus of this thread, Obama has once again proven how little he can be trusted. After coming to an agreement about the budget, just last Friday, he has reneged on the deal by ignoring the defunding of four of his many "Czars". These are positions paid for by taxpayers which have no congressional authorization nor oversight, but which are capable of influencing policy. In effect, they are BHO's "yes men". This is just another example of his treachery. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/04/16/obama-keeps-czars-despite-budget-deal-eliminated/
The Reaper
04-20-2011, 06:44
I am sorry I had to disregard when i saw "Fox News" in your link.
Why?
TR
Because liberals can't stand Fox news, sir.
IMHO, anyone who can not entertain a discussion with, or hear the opinion of those 'across the aisle' , and who is an obvious proponent of socialism, should probably go find utopia, for it is not here in my country.
I am sorry I had to disregard when i saw "Fox News" in your link.
Would you have preferred the liberal bastion of MSNBC?
...I look for another source first. Like BBC or CNN.
Say that last part again, (CNN), really?
ZonieDiver
04-20-2011, 16:21
Fox news are known liars they have been caught to many times lying. The post may be true but if it is coming from Fox I look for another source first. Like BBC or CNN.
Can you list TWO specific examples where Fox News was "caught" lying? I have heard this non-specific charge before, and though no great fan of Fox News, I am not sure I've ever seen something I thought specious... at least in their news segments as opposed to their commentary.
The Reaper
04-20-2011, 16:53
Fox news are known liars they have been caught to many times lying. The post may be true but if it is coming from Fox I look for another source first. Like BBC or CNN.
You won't watch Fox, which at least presents both sides of most issues, but you quote the Huffington Post.
Curious.
Lying is not the same as making a mistake. The libs used the "lying" line against Bush quite a bit.
What is your agenda?
TR
Deja vu-doodoo and the zombie vote in 2012 - watch for it. ;)
And so it goes...
Richard :munchin
You won't watch Fox, which at least presents both sides of most issues, but you quote the Huffington Post.
Curious.
Lying is not the same as making a mistake. The libs used the "lying" line against Bush quite a bit.
What is your agenda?
TR
Douchebaggery?
I always thought he was cool.
That's exactly how BHO got elected.
Drink the KoolAid and keep your head in the sand.
Surgicalcric
04-21-2011, 05:45
I was looking for reason why people don't like Obama. I always thought he was cool. These guys gave me some good points though.
I dont like him because he is disingenuous, a snake oil salesman, an apologist, socially and fiscally liberal, a coward, a career politician all of which makes him bad for our country.
As for you thinking "he was cool." "Cool" is the last thing we need in a president.
Crip
The Reaper
04-21-2011, 07:00
Douchebaggery?
In the first degree, hermano.
TR
Source is here (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/04/obamas-la-visit-westside-residents-urged-to-stay-home-to-avoid-traffic-gridlock.html).[The president's] L.A. visit: Westside residents urged to stay home to avoid gridlock
April 21, 2011 | 8:01 am
Authorities said they were taking steps to avoid a repeat of past gridlock when [the president] arrives in Los Angeles on Thursday afternoon.
Meanwhile, L.A. City Councilman Bill Rosendahl urged Westside residents to plan activities at home during the period the president will be moving around or face “putting yourself into potential gridlock.”
[The president] will arrive at Los Angeles International Airport at 2:45 p.m. He will spend some time at a fundraiser at the Sony Pictures lot in Culver City. He is scheduled to dine at the Tavern restaurant in Brentwood. It's unclear where he will spend the night, but the president is scheduled to depart from LAX about 9 a.m. Friday, at the heart of the morning commute.
[The president's] visit to L.A. last summer closed numerous streets from downtown L.A. through the Westside, turning 45-minute commutes into three-hour ordeals. In his next visit in the fall he used a helicopter for some stops, and the traffic situation improved.
"Every effort is being made to minimize the impact to the residential communities and businesses affected by the president’s visit," the Los Angeles Police Department said in a statement. "Although it is not always possible to provide advanced information regarding the specific routes of travel involving the president, we are committed to utilizing traffic control measures that minimize the impact upon commuters while still maintaining the safety of the President as well as the communities involved."
Rosendahl said that after the traffic nightmare last summer, he talked to White House officials and urged them to use a helicopter, which they ultimately did. He said the president’s advance team gave “encouraging signs that they appreciated that situation on the Westside.”
While there will be some hard closures and parking bans on designated streets, efforts would be made to quickly reopen them after the president’s motorcade passes by, he said.
“The president's security will be directly relate to the president’s movements and his security needs and will not be arbitrarily based. There will be flexibility,” Rosendahl said. “Frankly there wasn’t in that visit to Hancock Park. I'm hoping [this time] there will be a balance between the president’s security needs and the Westside constituents’ sensibility toward gridlock.”
Watch the fun here (http://www.sigalert.com/Map.asp?region=Greater+Los+Angeles#lat=33.98417&lon=-118.22335&z=2) and there (http://trafficinfo.lacity.org/index.html).
While the president does his thing, I hope that a number of drivers will take the time to think about the decision they made in 2008 and the one they will make next year as they ponder this (http://www.losangelesgasprices.com/), that (http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=usunemployment&met=unemployment_rate&idim=state:ST060000&dl=en&hl=en&q=california+unemployment+statistics#met=unemploym ent_rate&idim=state:ST060000&idim=county:CN060370&tdim=true), and the other.<<LINK (http://sports.espn.go.com/los-angeles/mlb/news/story?id=6397488)>>I was looking for reason why people don't like [the president]. I always thought he was cool. These guys gave me some good points though.
He is a self-serving opportunist who is driven by an ambition that far exceeds his abilities. He is the political equivalent of a reality television personality who confuses popularity for artistic achievement. He is unprincipled in that he will allow his supporters to think he shares their views and concerns. He is lazy and morally corrupt in that he will accept accolades that he has not earned. He is most dangerous because he overestimates his jejune intellect and he intentionally exploits race, class, and gender relations in America to his benefit.
Other than that...
______________________________________________
* Satoshi Tomiie featuring Kelli Ali, "Love in Traffic," remixed by John Digweed, Global Underground 019: Los Angeles (2001), disc 1, track 2.
incarcerated
04-21-2011, 10:48
The post may be true but if it is coming from Fox I look for another source first. Like BBC or CNN.
I was looking for reason why people don't like Obama. I always thought he was cool.
I’ve been consuming large amounts of CNN for the past two months. They have been consistently biased in favor of the rebels, be they Tunisian, Libyan or Egyptian, and in favor of the White House. While not as bad as MSNBC, they have been fulfilling their role of selling the rebel cause to the American people without really explaining it, or telling us who the rebels are. CNN has only been mildly critical of Obama, and usually for things like his hesitation to support the rebels with NATO air power. It has been nothing like their coverage of George Bush or the war in Iraq.
To help me understand why you’re having difficulty with this, could you tell me what unit you have served with, where your service was, and for what nation?
Airbornelawyer
04-21-2011, 14:26
I can see why someone who has drunk the Obama "cool"-Aid might jump on the anti-Fox News bandwagon, since bashing Fox News is second nature to this sort. Indeed, George Soros has spent millions of dollars feeding fellow leftists anti-Fox News talking points. And Ron Paul-bots are also known for their dispassionate reactions to any criticisms of their dear leader.
But the idea of calling Fox News liars and then citing CNN and the BBC as your go-to source? That is laughable.
CNN's own officials have admitted that they deliberately shaded their reporting and refused to cover stories that might embarrass Saddam Hussein's regime. Their defense was that they wanted to maintain access and being a willing tool of Iraqi propagandists was a small price to pay to be able to report "live from Baghdad." One wonders what other compromises they make with local thugs to "report" from Beijing or Tehran or Havana or elsewhere.
That said, even I would not dismiss a source out of hand due to bias (mine or the sources). A good analyst (of news, intelligence, whatever) doesn't mindlessly close off sources of information but assesses the information taking into account the credibility and reliability of the source. The fact is, even if you don't agree with its editorial spin, Fox News covers stories that other media outlets ignore, and only a rank partisan would dismiss it out of hand. And that goes both ways. I too follow coverage from CNN and BBC, applying the same grains of salt as I would with Fox. With the exception of the Arab-Israeli conflict, where the bias is stifling, the BBC actually covers the Middle East much better than most other Western news agencies. And the BBC's Africa coverage leaves American news agencies in the dust (probably our lack of a colonial legacy there means we pay less attention). For that matter, I will watch al-Jazeera for coverage of the Middle East (again, ex-Arab-Israeli conflict) to make sure my information picture is as complete as possible given available resources.
Of course, what is most laughable is that someone whose idea of political judgment is to be enamored of how "cool" a politician is, thinks he is qualified to participate in a discussion by serious-minded people.
alright4u
04-21-2011, 21:25
Don't criticize peoples opinions. Argue with them, fine. Calling everyone a Obama Hater, not an argument.
He is the most inexperienced modern day president we have had. It shows every day. For example. How aloof he is when making a decision
100% dead on. Zero and Oprah said the only way to change America was to destroy it.
This clown cannot make a decision. Who here wants "O" as there team leader?
Try to imagine him as your Mike Force BN CO? Try to put him in any position you can count on?
He could not earn a CSB. Combat Shit Burner Badge.
The end.