Barack Obama Officially Announces He's Running In 2012

[rdret1]

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...al-eliminated/

[The Reaper]

Originally Posted by LordReagal

I am sorry I had to disregard when i saw "Fox News" in your link.

Why?

TR

[Hand]

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.

[rdret1]

Originally Posted by LordReagal

I am sorry I had to disregard when i saw "Fox News" in your link.

Would you have preferred the liberal bastion of MSNBC?

Originally Posted by LordReagal

...I look for another source first. Like BBC or CNN.

Say that last part again, (CNN), really?

[ZonieDiver]

Originally Posted by LordReagal

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]

Originally Posted by LordReagal

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

[Richard]

Deja vu-doodoo and the zombie vote in 2012 - watch for it.

And so it goes...

Richard

[Dusty]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

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?

[Todd 1]

Originally Posted by LordReagal

I always thought he was cool.

That's exactly how BHO got elected.

Drink the KoolAid and keep your head in the sand.

[Surgicalcric]

Originally Posted by LordReagal

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]

Originally Posted by Dusty

Douchebaggery?

In the first degree, hermano.

TR

[Sigaba]

Source is here.

[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 and there.

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, that, and the other.<<LINK>>

Originally Posted by LordReagal

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]

Originally Posted by LordReagal

The post may be true but if it is coming from Fox I look for another source first. Like BBC or CNN.

Originally Posted by LordReagal

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]

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.