or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › The real reason for Obama's loss in popularity...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The real reason for Obama's loss in popularity... - Page 2

post #41 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

But I made it perfectly clear ( go back and read with glasses maybe ) that what I was asking wasn't about Obama's policies! It was simply about recovery! I restated the question many different ways so you'd get that.

As polite as I can put this is simply that you are lying. I'm not trying to attack you, but it is the simple truth.

Here is what you posted.

Quote:
Would you be ok with the situation if the economy improved even though it meant the fortunes of Obama ( it would look like his policy was working ) and the Democratic party would also improve?



I addressed this directly. I never addressed any aspects of Obama's policies or said particular policies were right or wrong. I expressly addressed the confusion this would cause and said that while not turning or wishing it away, it would be better if it were avoided. I gave examples of how you don't want people applying the exception as the rule aka smoking and lung cancer, flossing and tooth decay, etc. Your question asks people to endorse being mislead. Why would anyone endorse that Jimmac? You ask is it okay with you if something positive happens even if it makes people believe a lie. You state it right there with the words, it would look like his policy was working.

Quote:
But I guess when you read things you only see what you want to see. Based on that " Fallacy " the rest is a torrential down pour of illogic. Too late to back pedal or side step this one trumpy. My question was designed to point out if you were hopelessly partisan or not. Now we have the answer in spades.

I think you are so desperate to troll at this stage that you really don't remember what the hell you type anymore.

Quote:
In macrocosm that's what's wrong with the Republican party as a whole and the rightwing now days.

Enjoy the delusion. The Democrats are going into the toilet and trolling, loaded, hypotheticals that you then use to levy an array of accusations won't fix that a damn bit.

Quote:
What's so bad about recovering right now? The economy will take a downturn someday again no matter who's president. But right now people are hurting and wouldn't be nice if they got some relief? Wouldn't it?

There is nothing wrong with recovering. How can you not see that?? You probably can't because your question is asking someone to endorse a delusion. You state it right there. Would you want something good to happen if it would make people believe a lie. The ethical answer is no because when they buy that lie, many bad things would happen.

Worse still, you call endorsing the lie a non-partisan position. You call short term thinking non-partisan. How deluded and crazy is that? The long view of truth is the non-partisan and rational view to take. Hoping things turn up for 6 months so some party can claim credit and not suffer a bloodbath in the midterms while spitting out trillion dollar deficits and not even attempting to craft a budget isn't the non-partisan position to take. It is the PROFOUNDLY partisan position to take and claiming otherwise is just trolling.

Quote:
Thanks for making your position clear. All you had to do to avoid this is give an answer like NoahJ did. But I'm guessing your pride wouldn't let you.

God you love personal stuff don't you? Well yes of course they wanted me to quit. However I never smoked in their presence. That was a choice I made for myself. Bad analogy trumptman.

The choice to quit was mine as well. Cold turkey. You know. Will power.

You've ignored and mischaracterized my position. Stop making accusations for what you can't understand. Attempting to persecute someone for your own misunderstanding is just stupid. Your question read, would you endorse a positive if it lead to people believing a lie. Claim otherwise or toss up plenty of nonsense and accusations to obscure the issue.

The last bit is just the icing on the cake. You want to talk about the purest bit of boomer reasoning, "I never smoked in their presence" is just it. It shows the whole point of the question doesn't it. See no evil, thus there is no evil right? Buy the lie or else you are a partisan. Endorse it or else you are wishing ill will.

It is a giant load of bullcrap. Endorsing a lie isn't nobel.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #42 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

As polite as I can put this is simply that you are lying. I'm not trying to attack you, but it is the simple truth.

Here is what you posted.



I addressed this directly. I never addressed any aspects of Obama's policies or said particular policies were right or wrong. I expressly addressed the confusion this would cause and said that while not turning or wishing it away, it would be better if it were avoided. I gave examples of how you don't want people applying the exception as the rule aka smoking and lung cancer, flossing and tooth decay, etc. Your question asks people to endorse being mislead. Why would anyone endorse that Jimmac? You ask is it okay with you if something positive happens even if it makes people believe a lie. You state it right there with the words, it would look like his policy was working.



I think you are so desperate to troll at this stage that you really don't remember what the hell you type anymore.



Enjoy the delusion. The Democrats are going into the toilet and trolling, loaded, hypotheticals that you then use to levy an array of accusations won't fix that a damn bit.



There is nothing wrong with recovering. How can you not see that?? You probably can't because your question is asking someone to endorse a delusion. You state it right there. Would you want something good to happen if it would make people believe a lie. The ethical answer is no because when they buy that lie, many bad things would happen.

Worse still, you call endorsing the lie a non-partisan position. You call short term thinking non-partisan. How deluded and crazy is that? The long view of truth is the non-partisan and rational view to take. Hoping things turn up for 6 months so some party can claim credit and not suffer a bloodbath in the midterms while spitting out trillion dollar deficits and not even attempting to craft a budget isn't the non-partisan position to take. It is the PROFOUNDLY partisan position to take and claiming otherwise is just trolling.



You've ignored and mischaracterized my position. Stop making accusations for what you can't understand. Attempting to persecute someone for your own misunderstanding is just stupid. Your question read, would you endorse a positive if it lead to people believing a lie. Claim otherwise or toss up plenty of nonsense and accusations to obscure the issue.

The last bit is just the icing on the cake. You want to talk about the purest bit of boomer reasoning, "I never smoked in their presence" is just it. It shows the whole point of the question doesn't it. See no evil, thus there is no evil right? Buy the lie or else you are a partisan. Endorse it or else you are wishing ill will.

It is a giant load of bullcrap. Endorsing a lie isn't nobel.

Quote:
There is nothing wrong with recovering.

A little late now but better than nothing.

Quote:
Attempting to persecute someone for your own misunderstanding is just stupid.

I'm not trying to persecute you ( maybe trying to point out something to you ) but I'm after your arguments. They're partisan motivated at their heart ( let's talk about how Obama throws a baseball shall we? ).

I'm not lying or misrepresenting anything. Your arguments got caught with their collective pants down. Pure and simple.

Arguing solely for the sake of winning or a side and not what's right or good for all of us isn't nobel either. These are serious issues. Besides I don't think Obama is lying. I think he truly believes in what he's doing. I think he's a dreamer. Maybe we could have used more of a worker this time around but at least he's doing something positive. Which is more than I can say for his predecessor. You talk about Obama and deficits but you ignore who spent 8 years helping it along ( in a really big way ). By the way didn't this downturn start on Bush's watch? If it was already in motion before he took office how come in 8 years he didn't do anything to head it off?

Quote:
Enjoy the delusion. The Democrats are going into the toilet and trolling, loaded, hypotheticals that you then use to levy an array of accusations won't fix that a damn bit.

May I quote you later?
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #43 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

A little late now but better than nothing.


I'm not trying to persecute you ( maybe trying to point out something to you ) but I'm after your arguments. They're partisan motivated at their heart ( let's talk about how Obama throws a baseball shall we? ).

I'm not lying or misrepresenting anything. Your arguments got caught with their collective pants down. Pure and simple.

Arguing solely for the sake of winning or a side and not what's right or good for all of us isn't nobel either. These are serious issues. Besides I don't think Obama is lying. I think he truly believes in what he's doing. I think he's a dreamer. Maybe we could have used more of a worker this time around but at least he's doing something positive. Which is more than I can say for his predecessor. You talk about Obama and deficits but you ignore who spent 8 years helping it along ( in a really big way ). By the way didn't this downturn start on Bush's watch? If it was already in motion before he took office how come in 8 years he didn't do anything to head it off?

May I quote you later?

So as I see it, you just ignore everything posted now and keep restating your lies and accusations. I understand where you are coming from now. The intent game is all you ever play.

You know what Jimmac, let's flip it and see how you feel.

Let's pretend that Obama's policies are the end all be all of greatness. Let's pretend that they will end the recession and bring along incredible growth, but.. won't do so until nine months after the midterm elections.

So there is a Republican landslide and thanks to the massive new growth for which they are given complete and total credit, they not only retain power, but knock Obama out of office in 2012 after receiving full credit for the recovery thanks to convenient timing.

Will you be glad we recovered in that instance?

Remember anything less than an unqualified yes makes you a super-partisan and a bringer of ill-wishes. No qualifiers allowed just yes or no please.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #44 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Oh look! I'm on ignore!

Where's that famous will power? If you'll recall I never addressed you when I had you on ignore ( I even asked you to stop trying to draw me into a conversation ). So I decided if you're going to be that way It doesn't really matter.

Please don't start. The ones who do have willpower can't take it.

Quote:
But I made it perfectly clear ( go back and read with glasses maybe ) that what I was asking wasn't about Obama's policies! It was simply about recovery! I restated the question many different ways so you'd get that.

But I guess when you read things you only see what you want to see. Based on that " Fallacy " the rest is a torrential down pour of illogic. Too late to back pedal or side step this one trumpy. My question was designed to point out if you were hopelessly partisan or not. Now we have the answer in spades.

Look at my conversation with you. Put yourself squarely where you are placing Trumptman now. You are the Pot calling the kettle black by your own logic... Took me multiple tries to peel away your biased and partisan view to see my real answer.

The rest of your post, well, that is between you and Trumptman. I just can't stand blatant hypocrisy.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #45 of 98
Whatever guys. I think I've made my point.

In answer to trumpy's question " Yes ! " that's a no brainer. Won't happen of course but if it did just so the recession would end " Yes ". If that had to be the outcome because the recession ended I'd still be glad the recession ended. I'd be ok with it. Recessions affect everyone.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #46 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Whatever guys. I think I've made my point.

In answer to trumpy's question " Yes ! " that's a no brainer. Won't happen of course but if it did just so the recession would end " Yes ". If that had to be the outcome because the recession ended I'd still be glad the recession ended. I'd be ok with it. Recessions affect everyone.

I can find plenty more like this.... it isn't hard at all. You talked down the entire previous expansion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

That's dodging the bullet if I ever saw it.Then why does Bush even mention the economy in his campaign material?

I see. When it's going good it's because of his tax cuts. When it's bad he has nothing to do with it.

Face it. The actions of the president affect the economy in a big way. If he makes moves that drag the economy down the jobs go with it.

By the way this abnormal, anemic, recovery has been going on for some time now.

Face it. You've flipped and now are spewing pure nonsense.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #47 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

The worm will turn by fall SDW. It won't be the one you're expecting.

I wasn't aware I was expecting anything.

Quote:
Just like you thought the Democrats were melting down last time.

They were from 2001-2006. Then the war and concerns about spending took over.

Quote:
People will vote with their wallets. Once they see no Death panels, HCR is working fine, and the economy is looking up you know which way they'll go. Now if we had a big downturn between now and then that would all change. But I don't see that happening.

Healthcare won't have kicked in by fall...not even close. The only parts you'll see will be negative: Higher taxes and fewer doctors accepting medicare. So, let's how that works out, hmm? As for the economy, what do you mean "if we have a big downturn?" jimmac, the Democrats only hope is for a miraculous upswing. We're in a downturn. Recovery is slow and weak. Most indicators are showing very, very modest recovery. This recession was far worse than our most recent. If you recall, you were complaining in 2005 that the economy wasn't very strong. That was the same year that Alan Greenspan said the US Economy was the best he'd ever seen. If that wasn't good enough for you, what makes you think the current ABYSMAL economy will provide a foundation for Democrats to run on?

Don't misunderestimate, jimmac: Things are bad. We're already been told that we should expect nearly permanent high unemployment. Businesses are preparing to shed workers as healthcare mandates kick in. Housing starts are at near 50 year lows. Consumer confidence is poor. We have seen some modest recovery in real estate and the stock market. But even if those are treated as leading indicators, things aren't going to turn around in 7 months. The best the Dems can hope for is unemployment in the high 8% range.



Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Oh look! I'm on ignore!

Where's that famous will power? If you'll recall I never addressed you when I had you on ignore ( I even asked you to stop trying to draw me into a conversation ). So I decided if you're going to be that way It doesn't really matter.




But I made it perfectly clear ( go back and read with glasses maybe ) that what I was asking wasn't about Obama's policies! It was simply about recovery! I restated the question many different ways so you'd get that.

But I guess when you read things you only see what you want to see. Based on that " Fallacy " the rest is a torrential down pour of illogic. Too late to back pedal or side step this one trumpy. My question was designed to point out if you were hopelessly partisan or not. Now we have the answer in spades.

In macrocosm that's what's wrong with the Republican party as a whole and the rightwing now days.

What's so bad about recovering right now? The economy will take a downturn someday again no matter who's president. But right now people are hurting and wouldn't be nice if they got some relief? Wouldn't it?

Thanks for making your position clear. All you had to do to avoid this is give an answer like NoahJ did. But I'm guessing your pride wouldn't let you.

Ps.

God you love personal stuff don't you? Well yes of course they wanted me to quit. However I never smoked in their presence. That was a choice I made for myself. Bad analogy trumptman.

The choice to quit was mine as well. Cold turkey. You know. Will power.

I'd like to focus on the statement I put in bold face. This statement is exactly what's wrong with liberal thinking. The way to real relief is to stimulate the overall economy through tax cuts...for everyone. This creates jobs and work incentive. But liberals cannot get past the immediacy of a government handout. "We can't cut taxes for everyone, because while you get to buy a new muffler with your tax cut, that rich guy gets to buy a new Lexus! That's unfair!"
.
That's the thinking. What the liberal doesn't realize, though, is that rich guy is already paying a greater portion of the tax bill. And that Lexus he bought had to be designed, manufactured, transported, sold and serviced--all of which creates jobs. You cut taxes for the people that pay taxes. 99 week unemployment and and giving people money that don't pay taxes doesn't help.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #48 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I can find plenty more like this.... it isn't hard at all. You talked down the entire previous expansion.



Face it. You've flipped and now are spewing pure nonsense.

Once again trumpy didn't this latest downturn start during Bush's watch?

I know you'd like to sweep that fact under the rug but you can't.

Just like you guys were reminding us all of the recession before started during Clintons watch. The difference is it was over due for a downturn in the cycle.
So that makes 2 recessions during Bush's administration and this one's a doozy.

I think his handling of the economy was terrible.

However if it meant that the republicans take credit for something they didn't do ( again ) I'd still be for a recovery. If there was no other way. I'd be ok with it just to put an end to the business closures and job loss. And you said " Strong growth " I'd be for that no matter who's in office as well. However we really haven't seen strong growth since Clinton.

And remember I did say you could still hold your same opinions about Obama. This question wasn't about parties or politicians. It was about recovery. I made that quite clear so I haven't flipped on anything. Please don't even try to put your partisan attitude on me. It doesn't fit.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #49 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I wasn't aware I was expecting anything.



They were from 2001-2006. Then the war and concerns about spending took over.



Healthcare won't have kicked in by fall...not even close. The only parts you'll see will be negative: Higher taxes and fewer doctors accepting medicare. So, let's how that works out, hmm? As for the economy, what do you mean "if we have a big downturn?" jimmac, the Democrats only hope is for a miraculous upswing. We're in a downturn. Recovery is slow and weak. Most indicators are showing very, very modest recovery. This recession was far worse than our most recent. If you recall, you were complaining in 2005 that the economy wasn't very strong. That was the same year that Alan Greenspan said the US Economy was the best he'd ever seen. If that wasn't good enough for you, what makes you think the current ABYSMAL economy will provide a foundation for Democrats to run on?

Don't misunderestimate, jimmac: Things are bad. We're already been told that we should expect nearly permanent high unemployment. Businesses are preparing to shed workers as healthcare mandates kick in. Housing starts are at near 50 year lows. Consumer confidence is poor. We have seen some modest recovery in real estate and the stock market. But even if those are treated as leading indicators, things aren't going to turn around in 7 months. The best the Dems can hope for is unemployment in the high 8% range.





I'd like to focus on the statement I put in bold face. This statement is exactly what's wrong with liberal thinking. The way to real relief is to stimulate the overall economy through tax cuts...for everyone. This creates jobs and work incentive. But liberals cannot get past the immediacy of a government handout. "We can't cut taxes for everyone, because while you get to buy a new muffler with your tax cut, that rich guy gets to buy a new Lexus! That's unfair!"
.
That's the thinking. What the liberal doesn't realize, though, is that rich guy is already paying a greater portion of the tax bill. And that Lexus he bought had to be designed, manufactured, transported, sold and serviced--all of which creates jobs. You cut taxes for the people that pay taxes. 99 week unemployment and and giving people money that don't pay taxes doesn't help.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ........
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #50 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Once again trumpy didn't this latest downturn start during Bush's watch?

I know you'd like to sweep that fact under the rug but you can't.

Just like you guys were reminding us all of the recession before started during Clintons watch. The difference is it was over due for a downturn in the cycle.
So that makes 2 recessions during Bush's administration and this one's a doozy.

I think his handling of the economy was terrible.

However if it meant that the republicans take credit for something they didn't do ( again ) I'd still be for a recovery. If there was no other way. I'd be ok with it just to put an end to the business closures and job loss. And you said " Strong growth " I'd be for that no matter who's in office as well. However we really haven't seen strong growth since Clinton.

And remember I did say you could still hold your same opinions about Obama. This question wasn't about parties or politicians. It was about recovery. I made that quite clear so I haven't flipped on anything. Please don't even try to put your partisan attitude on me. It doesn't fit.

Thanks for ignoring the reality that you talked down the last entire cycle of growth during the Bush administration and continue to do so all while claiming you wouldn't on a hypothetical.

Can anyone else smell the bullshit?

Amazing how you will castigate someone for a hypothetical while the reality is that you, for purely political and partisan purposes talked down the entire previous economic expansion. Claiming you would be happy for strong growth no matter who is in office when I already quoted you doing the opposite is just hilariously hypocritical.

Quote:
By the way this abnormal, anemic, recovery has been going on for some time now.

That was what you called two months of job growth where over 600k+ jobs had been added, btw.

Sad, sad, sad. History shows what you would do, not hypothetical and not hypothetically but in reality, you talked down the economy for years all for political and partisan gain.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #51 of 98
Not really sure where this goes. Maybe we need a general "Obama Idiocy" thread. But, lacking that:

Obama says space program not a luxury

I suspect what's not a luxury are votes in Florida.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #52 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Thanks for ignoring the reality that you talked down the last entire cycle of growth during the Bush administration and continue to do so all while claiming you wouldn't on a hypothetical.

Can anyone else smell the bullshit?

Amazing how you will castigate someone for a hypothetical while the reality is that you, for purely political and partisan purposes talked down the entire previous economic expansion. Claiming you would be happy for strong growth no matter who is in office when I already quoted you doing the opposite is just hilariously hypocritical.



That was what you called two months of job growth where over 600k+ jobs had been added, btw.

Sad, sad, sad. History shows what you would do, not hypothetical and not hypothetically but in reality, you talked down the economy for years all for political and partisan gain.


I'll tell you what's sad. I finally got you on this point and you can't stand it. So now you're laying it on thick. But do you notice you're not getting much traction?

When I spoke of growth I was refering to what you mentioned in your hypothetical. " Strong gowth ". I really don't think anything during the Bush administration could compare with the longest running bull market in history during the Clinton years. Yes, yes, I know you blame dot coms or a republican congress. Whatever!

Quote:
Claiming you would be happy for strong growth no matter who is in office when I already quoted you doing the opposite is just hilariously hypocritical.


Trumpy you did no such thing. If Bush was still president ( say hypothetically ) and he pulled us out of this bad downturn I'd be happy about it. I'd still dislike him for other things he does but if he pulled us out of this mess with " Strong growth " I'd be happy. Anything else would be crazy because this affects Democrats, Independents, and Republicans alike. The whole country in other words. Why would I wish the opposite? I live here for christ's sake.

That's why I was blown away by you refusal to anwer my question. Surely you care about the country over political concerns.

But that's not what happened in reality is it? What happened during the Bush years was the worst downturn since the Great depression.

But of course you have nothing to say about that do you.

Really is that the best you can do? Take things I say out of context or omit parts of what I've said to try to paint a picture that makes me look as partisan as you?

Quote:
Can anyone else smell the bullshit?

Yes I can.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #53 of 98
What's interesting. jimmac, is that for someone who is repeatedly accusing others (specifically and, it seems, exclusively those whose opinions you disagree with) of being strongly partisan, you seem only able to view things in partisan terms.

Odd that.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #54 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

What's interesting. jimmac, is that for someone who is repeatedly accusing others (specifically and, it seems, exclusively those whose opinions you disagree with) of being strongly partisan, you seem only able to view things in partisan terms.

Odd that.

Funny I don't remember addressing you in this situation. But if you want to talk we can. Let's sart with your drive by quips about Obama and the space program. Let me guess you don't even care about space exploration. You just saw an opportunity to turn it into something else and take a shot at Obama. I'd call that partisan.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #55 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Funny I don't remember addressing you in this situation.

I don't care.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Let's sart with your drive by quips about Obama and the space program.

Let's.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Let me guess you don't even care about space exploration.

Actually, I really don't care that much about it. But Regardless of what I think, I don't see how it is in any way, shape or form the responsibility the federal government of the United States.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

You just saw an opportunity to turn it into something else and take a shot at Obama.




Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

I'd call that partisan.

Of course you will. It's all you can see. Thanks for proving my point.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #56 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

I don't care.




Let's.




Actually, I really don't care that much about it. But Regardless of what I think, I don't see how it is in any way, shape or form the responsibility the federal government of the United States.









Of course you will. It's all you can see. Thanks for proving my point.

Quote:
Actually, I really don't care that much about it. But Regardless of what I think, I don't see how it is in any way, shape or form the responsibility the federal government of the United States.

Then you agree with Obama that it's better to encourage private support ( I can tell you're really versed on this subject ).

He's looking for ways to do it cheaper than we are now. Basically we've been launching men into space the same way for 50 years. It's time we found some less expensive and more modern ways to do it. One way is private enterprise which Obama is in favor of. You can take your foot out of your mouth now.

And guess what? I don't really care about what kind of nonsense you spout either.

So come on let's get that tit for tat here. We all know you gotta have the last word. It's real important to you.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #57 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Then you agree with Obama that it's better to encourage private support

Actually I do. But he doesn't go far enough. His continued rhetoric and funding is pandering and buying votes.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

( I can tell you're really versed on this subject ).

And I can tell something about you too.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

He's looking for ways to do it cheaper than we are now.

But not cheap enough. He could cut funding much, eventually bringing it down to zero. But you know...it's not a luxury...it's a necessity.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

It's time we found some less expensive and more modern ways to do it. One way is private enterprise which Obama is in favor of.

Only partly. If he was really in favor of private enterprise (we all know Obama isn't) he would have simply shut government funding of the whole thing down. He also wouldn't have taken over GM, continued the bailouts of Wall Street and shoved the government's fist further up the ass of the health care marketplace. Saying that Obama believes in the free enterprise system is a lie told by people either too stupid, blind or partisan to see beyond his rhetoric to reality.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

You can take your foot out of your mouth now.

And you can take your head out of your ass.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

And guess what I don't really care about what kind of nonsense you spout either.

Prove it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

So come on let's get that tit for tat here. We all know you gotta have the last word. It's real important to you.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #58 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

I'll tell you what's sad. I finally got you on this point and you can't stand it. So now you're laying it on thick. But do you notice you're not getting much traction?

I like this delusional theory you put forward full of accusations to substitute for reality.

Quote:
When I spoke of growth I was refering to what you mentioned in your hypothetical. " Strong gowth ". I really don't think anything during the Bush administration could compare with the longest running bull market in history during the Clinton years. Yes, yes, I know you blame dot coms or a republican congress. Whatever!

For much of the Bush years the unemployment rate was lower than the Clinton years. I'm not blaming anyone. I've noted that Clinton' surplus was a result of the stock bubble and a Republican Congress. That's not blaming Bush for anything.

Quote:
Trumpy you did no such thing. If Bush was still president ( say hypothetically ) and he pulled us out of this bad downturn I'd be happy about it. I'd still dislike him for other things he does but if he pulled us out of this mess with " Strong growth " I'd be happy. Anything else would be crazy because this affects Democrats, Independents, and Republicans alike. The whole country in other words. Why would I wish the opposite? I live here for christ's sake.

The problem with this line of bullshit is we don't need the hypothetical. We actually did recover from the 2001 recession and did so very strongly. You weren't at all happy about it. You continually talked it down and bad mouthed it. You shat all over it for the entire term of his presidency. To suggest anything different is what is crazy because we don't need a hypothetical for you. We have your actual posting history to confirm this. You absolutely played it for political purposes and you absolutely kept talking it down in hopes of Democratic gain. You did this for years and there is complete proof of it on here.

Quote:
That's why I was blown away by you refusal to anwer my question. Surely you care about the country over political concerns.

What should blow you away is your own inability to remember your own posting history. I already posted one example. I can easily find dozens more where you talked down massive improvements in the employment rate and large numbers of jobs being added. The timeframe I am quoting from was before the 2004 re-election where the average unemployment rate was 5.5% and you were calling this bad.

Quote:
But that's not what happened in reality is it? What happened during the Bush years was the worst downturn since the Great depression.

But of course you have nothing to say about that do you.

Of course I do. The downturn didn't happen until Democrats came to power in the Congress starting in 2006. You can also see the deficit went from averages of $250 billion a year to $400 billion a year.
Quote:
Really is that the best you can do? Take things I say out of context or omit parts of what I've said to try to paint a picture that makes me look as partisan as you?

First I don't claim to be non-partisan. Likewise I don't toss the word around like a slur. I'm simply noting that you are actually guilty of the hypothetical you are putting before others. For you it isn't a hypothetical but your actual posting history.

Here is a post where you dismiss 5.5% unemployment declaring that they weren't the "right" jobs and complaining that all the "good" jobs were gone. Please note that now you are saying anything would be great and there you dismiss 5.5% unemployment.

I can keep finding them for as long as you want to keep denying them. There are probably a hundred posts of you dismissing 5.5% unemployment as burger jobs alone.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #59 of 98
jimmac,

Sorry dude...we've got you dead to rights on this one. The examples of you slamming the Bush economy are abundant. During his tenure, 5.5% unemployment was unacceptable. You posted state-by-state unemployment data, showing higher rates in some places. You claimed it was a jobless recovery and constantly used the phrase "things aren't as good as they should be."

Hey, but now...we're recovering and have been for some time! Of course, to make that statement, one has to ignore an unemployment rate nearly double what it was when you were condemning Bush. The states that you pointed out 5 years ago now have double-digit unemployment.

This is perhaps the ultimate example of hypocrisy on AI. First prize.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #60 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I like this delusional theory you put forward full of accusations to substitute for reality.



For much of the Bush years the unemployment rate was lower than the Clinton years. I'm not blaming anyone. I've noted that Clinton' surplus was a result of the stock bubble and a Republican Congress. That's not blaming Bush for anything.



The problem with this line of bullshit is we don't need the hypothetical. We actually did recover from the 2001 recession and did so very strongly. You weren't at all happy about it. You continually talked it down and bad mouthed it. You shat all over it for the entire term of his presidency. To suggest anything different is what is crazy because we don't need a hypothetical for you. We have your actual posting history to confirm this. You absolutely played it for political purposes and you absolutely kept talking it down in hopes of Democratic gain. You did this for years and there is complete proof of it on here.



What should blow you away is your own inability to remember your own posting history. I already posted one example. I can easily find dozens more where you talked down massive improvements in the employment rate and large numbers of jobs being added. The timeframe I am quoting from was before the 2004 re-election where the average unemployment rate was 5.5% and you were calling this bad.



Of course I do. The downturn didn't happen until Democrats came to power in the Congress starting in 2006. You can also see the deficit went from averages of $250 billion a year to $400 billion a year.


First I don't claim to be non-partisan. Likewise I don't toss the word around like a slur. I'm simply noting that you are actually guilty of the hypothetical you are putting before others. For you it isn't a hypothetical but your actual posting history.

Here is a post where you dismiss 5.5% unemployment declaring that they weren't the "right" jobs and complaining that all the "good" jobs were gone. Please note that now you are saying anything would be great and there you dismiss 5.5% unemployment.

I can keep finding them for as long as you want to keep denying them. There are probably a hundred posts of you dismissing 5.5% unemployment as burger jobs alone.

Quote:
What should blow you away is your own inability to remember your own posting history

Naw! What blows me away is the fact that I got under your skin so bad!

Now you've been carrying on for several posts about me and Bush and what I've said 2 years ago or so and very little about the topic. Get back on topic.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #61 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

jimmac,

Sorry dude...we've got you dead to rights on this one. The examples of you slamming the Bush economy are abundant. During his tenure, 5.5% unemployment was unacceptable. You posted state-by-state unemployment data, showing higher rates in some places. You claimed it was a jobless recovery and constantly used the phrase "things aren't as good as they should be."

Hey, but now...we're recovering and have been for some time! Of course, to make that statement, one has to ignore an unemployment rate nearly double what it was when you were condemning Bush. The states that you pointed out 5 years ago now have double-digit unemployment.

This is perhaps the ultimate example of hypocrisy on AI. First prize.

Quote:
Sorry dude...we've got you dead to rights on this one.

Quote:
You claimed it was a jobless recovery and constantly used the phrase "things aren't as good as they should be."


And yes now we have another much worse jobless recovery for a much worse recession that started during guess who's administration?

What about that SDW? This all started while Bush was in office. Also in my question to trumptman I said he could still hold his opinions about Obama and it didn't require ( or was an attempt to trick him into ) a change of position. It was only about being for recovery no matter what. So what is it you think you've got?

Dude all you've got is thin air. You guys really think you've latched on to something here but you're totally derailing this thread trying to get back at me for catching trumpy on his partisan attitude. Talk about the topic. You guys look extra silly.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #62 of 98
It's not just jimmac, it's the media as well. During Bush's tenure no signs of recovery or improvement were good enough and were dismissed or countered with other negative indicators. But now, with His Highness in office, the tone is moderated significantly and anyone pointing out anything not in line with the "we've turned the corner" and "we've avoided an even worse situation" talking points is simply a racist partisan looney.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #63 of 98
AHHHHHHH!!!!!!! Ignore!
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #64 of 98
So, as jimmac suggests (despite his participation in the "derailment"), let us get back to the real reasons for Obama's popularity dip...

What could it be?

Are liberals abandoning him because he's not liberal enough?

Are independents and moderates abandoning him because well that whole "hope and change" thing didn't quite work out like they thought and someone who ran with a thin veil of centrism turned out to be more classic big government, tax, spend, the government has to be involved with everything liberal?

Is it a mix of these things?

Is it just "the economy stupid?"

My guess it is mostly two things: the economy and the health care bill and, in particular, the way that was done.

If the economy recovers a bit by 2012, many people's disenchantment with Obama will be muted and softened. People have fairly short memories. If it doesn't, and he continues to blame Bush (which appears to be his primary governing strategy), I suspect things will not go well.

For as dumb and superficial as the American voting public seems to be at times. As a group, I think they sometimes have an intuition about people and events. I suspect their intuition right now is "Oh dear, we might have made a mistake."

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #65 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

And yes now we have another much worse jobless recovery for a much worse recession that started during guess who's administration?

What about that SDW? This all started while Bush was in office.

So the recession began during Bush's administration. This appears to be en empirical fact. But there are other empirical facts as well. Deficits during the Bush administration began to rise rapidly after the Democrats took control of congress (who actually controls spending) in 2006. Deficits began to rise even faster after the Democrats took control of congress and the White House in 2009. Unemployment has continued to rise and somewhere around 3-4 million additional jobs have been lost since Barack Obama took office.

This is the question then. Is the president responsible for the things that happen during his term or not? And how much grace period is he to be reasonably given during transitions of presidential administrations?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #66 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

So, as jimmac suggests (despite his participation in the "derailment"), let us get back to the real reasons for Obama's popularity dip...

What could it be?

Are liberals abandoning him because he's not liberal enough?

Or because he is not liberal at all?

Because he is just 'more of the same' ?

Because all the hype and spin was just that - only hype and spin.

All politicians do that of course - ie lie - but it seems only liberals are intelligent enough to see through it - and honest enough to jump ship.

Wingers don't really notice when they are lied to and on the rare occasions they do (freak weather conditions or too much/not enough medication) they just bleat and defend it all the more. Turkeys voting for Xmas.

Quote:
Are independents and moderates abandoning him because well that whole "hope and change" thing didn't quite work out like they thought and someone who ran with a thin veil of centrism turned out to be more classic big government, tax, spend, the government has to be involved with everything liberal?

As above...yes. This is a good thing.... it shows some sections of the US population still have integrity and really want change despite being palmed off with the snake oil.

Quote:
Is it a mix of these things?

Obviously.

Quote:
Is it just "the economy stupid?"

It is for right-wingers....economic factors are their alpha and omega and the yardstick by which everything is measured - from security, reasons for war, any definition of success and even the meaning of life.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #67 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Or because he is not liberal at all?

This seems wrong. I won't think I could say is not liberal at all. But then maybe we need to define terms so we're not talking past one another. What would you consider to be "liberal?"


Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Because he is just 'more of the same' ?

In many ways this is true also. It is something of a paradox. But only partly and only if you consider Bush to be a true "conservative." Again, we probably need to define terms. I've been toying with starting a thread where we could just get everyone's definitions out on the table: liberal, conservative, socialist, fascist, capitalism, etc.


Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Because all the hype and spin was just that - only hype and spin.

Well there was definitely some of that too. I agree.


Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

All politicians do that of course - ie lie - but it seems only liberals are intelligent enough to see through it - and honest enough to jump ship.

Wingers don't really notice when they are lied to and on the rare occasions they do (freak weather conditions or too much/not enough medication) they just bleat and defend it all the more. Turkeys voting for Xmas.

Uh huh.



Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

It is for right-wingers....economic factors are their alpha and omega and the yardstick by which everything is measured - from security, reasons for war, any definition of success and even the meaning of life.

You appear to be using "wingers" to refer to some group. Is this people you consider "right wing" only? Please clarify. Further, how do you reconcile the above claim with the electoral strategies and victories of Bill Clinton? Surely you're not claiming that conservatives voted for him because he said he would (and appeared to) improve the economy? That's how he got the independent, middle of the road folks.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #68 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

This seems wrong. I won't think I could say is not liberal at all. But then maybe we need to define terms so we're not talking past one another. What would you consider to be "liberal?"

I'm probably using it in the European sense which means quite Left leaning. Possibly part-Socialist but not too extreme.

Quote:
In many ways this is true also. It is something of a paradox. But only partly and only if you consider Bush to be a true "conservative." Again, we probably need to define terms. I've been toying with starting a thread where we could just get everyone's definitions out on the table: liberal, conservative, socialist, fascist, capitalism, etc.

I think these terms are redundant now though. We can define them but in a sense history has left them behind.

My take on it is that we don't have ideologies anymore which political figures espouse but rather we have political figures who adopt policies from anywhere on the political spectrum for two main reasons:

1) to get elected - tailored to the public opinion they think will prevail at an election or which can be sold at one

2) as a response to an outside influence such as a terrorist attack or economic crisis

So there is no 'left' or 'right' response to circumstances as might have happened in the past - rather there is only one response and then an argument between the factions about whether it is right or wrong.

But essentially Obama is not really doing anything Bush would not do. Just doing it in a different way - the end result is the same. Or will be.

Quote:
You appear to be using "wingers" to refer to some group. Is this people you consider "right wing" only? Please clarify. Further, how do you reconcile the above claim with the electoral strategies and victories of Bill Clinton? Surely you're not claiming that conservatives voted for him because he said he would (and appeared to) improve the economy? That's how he got the independent, middle of the road folks.

Well, I don't necessarily accept that the US definition of left/right is a universal one. It holds true within the US perhaps but on a world scale US politics IS only right-wing.

I guess I am thinking in terms of a more global view of Obama rather than a purely US one.

Btw, I was in Germany recently and Obama is like a God there. Seriously....I'm not exaggerating here. I got in a lot of trouble at two separate dinner parties for criticizing him. People got very, very angry.

And this 'hope' and 'yes we can' meme is pretty much everywhere...not so much these last few months but it is very interesting. How and why did this happen?
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #69 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

I'm probably using it in the European sense which means quite Left leaning. Possibly part-Socialist but not too extreme.

See, in that sense I would say he's a liberal. But still maybe not from your vantage point.


Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

I think these terms are redundant now though. We can define them but in a sense history has left them behind.

I agree. These labels and terms have been muddied and twisted and changed and co-opted over time as to often be meaningless.


Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

My take on it is that we don't have ideologies anymore which political figures espouse but rather we have political figures who adopt policies from anywhere on the political spectrum for two main reasons:

1) to get elected - tailored to the public opinion they think will prevail at an election or which can be sold at one

2) as a response to an outside influence such as a terrorist attack or economic crisis

So there is no 'left' or 'right' response to circumstances as might have happened in the past - rather there is only one response and then an argument between the factions about whether it is right or wrong.

I never really thought of precisely that way, but I think you are right. This adds to the confusion in use of labels to describe the person. To that end I've tried (though not 100% successfully) to focus on the actual actions taken. I think this is the root of the problem ultimately. Decisions are being made in reactionary ways for short-term political gain without a well thought out set of principles and values behind them.


Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

But essentially Obama is not really doing anything Bush would not do. Just doing it in a different way - the end result is the same. Or will be.

I mostly agree with that.


Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Well, I don't necessarily accept that the US definition of left/right is a universal one. It holds true within the US perhaps but on a world scale US politics IS only right-wing.

I guess I am thinking in terms of a more global view of Obama rather than a purely US one.

Fair enough. That makes the terms even harder because we all tend to assume everyone else is thinking the same thing when we say X or Y.


Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Btw, I was in Germany recently and Obama is like a God there. Seriously....I'm not exaggerating here. I got in a lot of trouble at two separate dinner parties for criticizing him. People got very, very angry.

And this 'hope' and 'yes we can' meme is pretty much everywhere...not so much these last few months but it is very interesting. How and why did this happen?

That is very interesting. I'd be curious to know why also.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #70 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

AHHHHHHH!!!!!!! Ignore!

Please don't.... If you are going to ignore, just do it...
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #71 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post


That is very interesting. I'd be curious to know why also.

My sig' line may explain it.



Obama ran as a type of bipartisan technocrat. The smartest man in the room that would pool the experts and do the right thing. But that was for the election. His record and his instincts are the opposite of that. Which is ... jam through what we want. "We" being our political allies.

That's what accelerates the tea party movement. And that's why his popularity is dropping.
post #72 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

That is very interesting. I'd be curious to know why also.

Abandoned missile shield, nuclear disarmament, shows intelligence, cap and trade, Iraq withdrawal, builds international consensus, builds on international consensus, listens,...

One day in the life:
orders hospital who receive fed $ to allow gay partners to visit ...
signs unemployment benefit extensions ...
hosts the most leaders since UN was founded ...

Let's face it the dude makes every cons head spin, they can't even keep up with making up shit anymore, it has become laughable.
yes I want oil genocide.
Reply
yes I want oil genocide.
Reply
post #73 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

My sig' line may explain it.

I kinda thought that might be it too. Wondered whether or not the German people have an affinity for inspirational rhetoric and those who provide it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

Obama ran as a type of bipartisan technocrat. The smartest man in the room that would pool the experts and do the right thing. But that was for the election. His record and his instincts are the opposite of that. Which is ... jam through what we want. "We" being our political allies.

That's what accelerates the tea party movement. And that's why his popularity is dropping.

Agreed. In so many ways, he has become the very opposite of what he promised his adoring fans and followers.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #74 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wormhole View Post

Abandoned missile shield, nuclear disarmament, shows intelligence, cap and trade, Iraq withdrawal, builds international consensus, builds on international consensus, listens,...

One day in the life:
orders hospital who receive fed $ to allow gay partners to visit ...
signs unemployment benefit extensions ...
hosts the most leaders since UN was founded ...

Let's face it the dude makes every cons head spin, they can't even keep up with making up shit anymore, it has become laughable.

Like much of Obama's work he didn't really make progress on any of those things. In fact he has actually push away our allies and embraced our adversaries. France is pretty pissed at Obama and he's estranged from England and soured things with Afghanistan ... What international consensus has he built?


I think Europe is still caught in the cult of Obama. They like the media image and the Passion that's been given to them.
post #75 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wormhole View Post

Abandoned missile shield, nuclear disarmament, shows intelligence, cap and trade, Iraq withdrawal, builds international consensus, builds on international consensus, listens,...



You're almost as good as jimmac for entertainment value. Let's take these one at a time:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wormhole View Post

Abandoned missile shield

OK.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Wormhole View Post

nuclear disarmament

There has been no nuclear disarmament.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Wormhole View Post

shows intelligence

Key word here is "shows" as in appears to have intelligence. Not the same as actually having it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Wormhole View Post

cap and trade

Got me here. We know the Europeans love to tax people and will love to see the American economy throttled.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Wormhole View Post

Iraq withdrawal

There has been no withdrawal from Iraq. You also failed to mention the additional deployment to Afghanistan. The war he running in Pakistan and the one he's starting with Iran. Do they love him because of that too?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wormhole View Post

builds international consensus

Uh huh. Probably including those he is continuing or starting wars with.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Wormhole View Post

listens

Sure. To himself. To his special interest supporters.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #76 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

I think Europe is still caught in the cult of Obama. They like the media image and the Passion that's been given to them.

I think part of the European infatuation with Obama is they see him as the bringer of European Democratic Socialism to America.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #77 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

I think part of the European infatuation with Obama is they see him as the bringer of European Democratic Socialism to America.

Yea maybe. Why would they care though?

Is it that the example of the US serves as a foil to european style government? Critics of their government can always point to the US and say "well of course they have more influence in the world ... they can project their power unlike us" or "if you want to lower youth unemployment you should do what the US does" ...


What is it about Europe and Obama?
post #78 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

Yea maybe. Why would they care though?

Validation. You can't be wrong if everyone else is doing it*. This was a key argument behind so-called healthcare "reform." This, of course, is a profound fallacy, but we should not let things like logic and reason get in the way of building Utopia.


Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

What is it about Europe and Obama?

True love.


*I, for one, am quite glad I resisted the "everyone else is doing it" urges, temptations and arguments to use my home as an ATM machine, live up a life of big gadgets and cool vacations (on home equity and credit card debt) over the last several years. We lived more modestly. Comfortably, but modestly. But we are largely debt free (only owe about 25% on my home) and have cash in the bank to act as my "unemployment insurance" (should I need it). So, in that case, the "everyone else is doing it" argument was wrong. Often it is. It's not a logical argument anyway.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #79 of 98
Thread Starter 
Well, they loved Bill, too, and hated George W.

Maybe, they are looking at us from an objective point of view... nah... couldn't be!
post #80 of 98
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

I think part of the European infatuation with Obama is they see him as the bringer of European Democratic Socialism to America.

I wish he would, but it doesn't look like he's going to even try.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › The real reason for Obama's loss in popularity...