Why do all the other posts in this thread get deleted & we continually see this. Yeah, it's all Obama's fault. Feel better!
It doesn't matter what the truth or any documented historical facts are you wouldn't believe it anyway.
Obama has a lot of faults; the biggest one being his extraordinary level of dishonesty, as well as broken promises to the American public. Can't blame a guy for trying, but you can blame a guy whose only intent is to play a strictly partisan game, fiat via blank check diplomacy and immovable even when popular opinion is overwhelmingly against his agenda.
Obama was named Liar of the Year, as noted. That's a fact. He was also recently polled as the worst President in history since Hoover. Hoover! the Prez who took the blame for the not getting us out of the Great Depression! (so yep, even worse than Bush) That's also a fact. I've studied the Presidents more than enough to know that it can take a couple of generations to fully assess how well a POTUS performed in office, but right now it is not looking good for #44. I'm not going to say that what would save his legacy is kowtowing to Congress, but he is going to have to learn to work with them, and I don't think he's capable of doing that... initiatives from the House and Executive are bound to stay stuck in neutral, very similar to the Carter era.
Blame-shifting? Face the facts. For years we had to listen to 'President' Cheney's press secretaries awkwardly explain our involvement in two horrid wars and the collapse of our economy. The recent fabricated 'scandals' of the Obama administration pale in comparison.
How ironic the current press speaker is named 'Earnest'! He can't possibly be 'earnest' working for this administration, right? The Republican scandal machine is working feverishly to convince the electorate that this is one of the worst Presidents we've had in history, and you've bought into their message completely. Congratulations on relinquishing your right to interpret what is happening in Washington, and giving in to the vagaries of the Murdoch/Fox/Koch Bros. plan for a more 'Prosperous' America. Just face it, you can't stand our current President. Your lame justifications are laughable.
The topic of this thread is about Jay Carney, who was part of the Obama administration. The Bush administration left office several years ago; and you nearly put me to sleep with that tired old "blame Bush" meme (Obama's favorite fallback, of course... some people just can't be accountable for their own failings, can they?) So, YEP. Blame-shifting is all this administration knows.
As mentioned, Obama was named Liar of the Year, by a news outlet that has typically been pretty favorable to him. Which - back to topic - never really boded well for the suggestion that Carney would be an acceptable PR man for Apple. And considering who we're talking about, whether you can even process it or not, a guy named Earnest who is the front man for this administration is very ironic.
Leave it to the fanboys who voted this guy into office - with whom media outlets have almost entirely had a love affair with over the past several years - to cry fowl when multiple polls demonstrate that the skies don't actually part every time he steps up to a teleprompter.
Sorry bubby, more informed folks don't need interpretation for what's going on with this administration, neither are we willing to sit through it with blinders on. What's happening in Washington is largely a problem of Obama's own ineptitude and extraordinary lack of leadership experience. Some of us simply expect someone more capable and qualified than a pigheaded community organizer for high office... enjoy the results, though. Hey, I do. Seriously! I'm all for a President who aspires to visit all of our nation's 57 states. " src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
Blame-shifting? Face the facts. For years we had to listen to 'President' Cheney's press secretaries awkwardly explain our involvement in two horrid wars and the collapse of our economy. The recent fabricated 'scandals' of the Obama administration pale in comparison.
How ironic the current press speaker is named 'Earnest'! He can't possibly be 'earnest' working for this administration, right? The Republican scandal machine is working feverishly to convince the electorate that this is one of the worst Presidents we've had in history, and you've bought into their message completely. Congratulations on relinquishing your right to interpret what is happening in Washington, and giving in to the vagaries of the Murdoch/Fox/Koch Bros. plan for a more 'Prosperous' America. Just face it, you can't stand our current President. Your lame justifications are laughable.
Awarding you the "got the buzzwords and talking points" down gold star for the day.
"Fabricated scandals." Check.
"Republican scandal machine." Check.
"Working feverishly." Check.
Obligatory dragging in a red herring that mentions the Koch Brothers
And Murdoch and Fox. Check. Check. Check.
The systemic economic problems in the country are all the Republicans' fault. Check.
Your mom will be proud when you get home. If you ever leave it, that is....
PS: To be fair (a concept kinda foreign to you, but props where due), you're not that far off on trying to put a positive face on the disastrous invasion of Iraq.
The topic of this thread is about Jay Carney, who was part of the Obama administration. The Bush administration left office several years ago; and you nearly put me to sleep with that tired old "blame Bush" meme (Obama's favorite fallback, of course... some people just can't be accountable for their own failings, can they?) So, YEP. Blame-shifting is all this administration knows.
As mentioned, Obama was named Liar of the Year, by a news outlet that has typically been pretty favorable to him. Which - back to topic - never really boded well for the suggestion that Carney would be an acceptable PR man for Apple. And considering who we're talking about, whether you can even process it or not, a guy named Earnest who is the front man for this administration is very ironic.
Leave it to the fanboys who voted this guy into office - with whom media outlets have almost entirely had a love affair with over the past several years - to cry fowl when multiple polls demonstrate that the skies don't actually part every time he steps up to a teleprompter.
Sorry bubby, more informed folks don't need interpretation for what's going on with this administration, neither are we willing to sit through it with blinders on. What's happening in Washington is largely a problem of Obama's own ineptitude and extraordinary lack of leadership experience. Some of us simply expect someone more capable and qualified than a pigheaded community organizer for high office... enjoy the results, though. Hey, I do. Seriously! I'm all for a President who aspires to visit all of our nation's 57 states. " src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
What are the Republicans in congress approval ratings?
Doesn't Congress have to pass a bill in order for the President to sign it? I wonder if you even have a clue as to how Government works.
As far as blame shifting goes the Bush administration did plenty of damage & should take responsibility for that. That's not blame shifting. Thanks for the Frank Luntz marketing buzzwords! Yes it is the President's responsibility to deal with the problems, but Congress has just as much of an obligation to this country. Look at the Highway's in this country Republican's can't even get their act together on that. The national Highway system can be accredited to Eisenhower (a Republican) funding of it's upkeep & infrastructure funding have usually been a non-partisan issue.
Thanks for a bunch of truncated YouTube videos with no context that prove nothing.
Solyndra: Umm he was talking about the loan guarantee program not Solyndra loan itself, but of course that doesn't fit your talking points. Funny I didn't hear Bush's name at all.
57 states! Wow no other President's or presidential candidates make mistakes! Thanks again for the short video!
Like I said it doesn't matter what reality is or historical fact you will never believe it.
Right, politicians never lie, spin or cover up serious mistakes. Just like multiple hard drives with sensitive emails are absolutely prone to simultaneously spontaneously implode. There is NO corruption in government! None whatsover… that Watergate thing? Pure fiction.
Obviously you are content to completely ignore the context of my previous comment inasmuch as you enjoy whistling past the graveyard, but I will keep my money exactly where it should be: following the paper trail, rather than spare embarassment to a seriously incompetent administration.
Since Issa is an opponent, and a powerful and resourceful one as well, House Committee chairmen aren't impotent, it is precisely some one who is an entrenched enemy of the administration who would be the least likely to lie to cover up some malfeasance on the part of the administration in relation to Benghazi. Carney might spin, Clinton might downplay but Issa is going for the throat. That HE investigates unendingly and comes up empty is, IMHO, the best indicator there's no there there.
So you spew rhetoric of delusion while deluding yourself to the thought that everyone is wrong if they disagree with you?
Seems pretty stupid, but hey.
Yeah, that's what I'm doing. There were postings here from both sides of the discussion that were deleted. Have anything intelligent to say? I sure you agree with all human beings on the planet because you are a special little snowflake (in your mind). Stop putting words in my mouth. I'm sure that's a problem for you with all the voices going on in your head. Here as an example of another poster that had a different point of view than mine: (Howie) Hey, AI! Why did you delete my post? Didn't like the political message? Thanks for defending the First Amendment!
You know what I said about salt in another post of mine to you it still applies.
Doesn't Congress have to pass a bill in order for the President to sign it? I wonder if you even have a clue as to how Government works.
I’d wonder if you had a clue what he was talking about, but I already know you don’t; I don’t need to wonder.
As far as blame shifting goes the Bush administration did plenty of damage & should take responsibility for that. That's not blame shifting.
You’re right. Unfortunately, the discussion at hand doesn’t concern them.
Like I said it doesn't matter what reality is or historical fact you will never believe it.
Ah, irony.
Originally Posted by Splif
You know what I said about salt in another post of mine to you it still applies.
That your posts should be taken with a grain of salt, perhaps? Phew! That’s a relief. I was afraid all the words you were typing about absolutely nothing on topic were supposed to be taken seriously.
LOL! Pretty much the same as Democrats. " src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" /> Which is meaningless point to make anyway, since both sides of the aisle are not only fairly well linked up in ratings, but typically low, historically. And I know that Congress' role is not to just sign blank checks so that Obama can do whatever he wants, no questions asked. Don't you?
Approval ratings of presidents highs & lows:
Your point being what - that Obama never was, nor ever will be as popular as Bush?
Thanks for a bunch of truncated YouTube videos with no context that prove nothing.
Solyndra: Umm he was talking about the loan guarantee program not Solyndra loan itself, but of course that doesn't fit your talking points.
The videos that demonstrate Obama's own confusion and deception are self-evident. One of them shows him willing to not only pass the blame for having p*ssed away half a billion dollars, but do that with a bald-faced lie. The loan guarantee does, what? Guarantee a loan!!! Obama's administration was fully engaged in throwing money at a pie in the sky project, without Republican support. Which of course they tried to spin their way out of later when Solyndra folded.There is plenty of context in my references, and your refusal of reality is puerile and asinine.
57 states! Wow no other President's or presidential candidates make mistakes!
Yep, we're talking basic info from a 4th grade lesson plan, here. Ain't no getting around that embarrassment! Maybe he could take a page from his own book on foreign policy and try to avoid "saying stupid s#!t". " src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
Isn’t it 3% for Congress overall? Why aren’t we arresting people left and right? Why will nothing change this November? If people really care this little, shouldn’t voting be reduced to the competent only?
Isn’t it 3% for Congress overall? Why aren’t we arresting people left and right? Why will nothing change this November? If people really care this little, shouldn’t voting be reduced to the competent only?
Agreed (mostly). While it's fair to say that if only informed people were allowed to vote, we would have a more competent government that would be much more accountable than it ever has been... though we would also be giving up what should be "by the people, for the people."
Jefferson and Jackson both brought out Democracy in its most spirited form by way of unruly mobs, inasmuch as Democrats these days have an overabundance of useful idiots on hand.
I would love to believe that we can get real change (for the betterment of the general population rather than a prescribed demographic) from our politicians, and not a bunch of campaign slogans and empty promises... we will need to demolish our two-party system of corruption and business-as-usual in order for that to happen, though. I wish that Ralph Nader had not been chased away from the Presidential Debates under threat of arrest. And that Gary Johnson had gotten his 5%. But that is unfortunately what we're locked in to these days.
Since Issa is an opponent, and a powerful and resourceful one as well, House Committee chairmen aren't impotent, it is precisely some one who is an entrenched enemy of the administration who would be the least likely to lie to cover up some malfeasance on the part of the administration in relation to Benghazi. Carney might spin, Clinton might downplay but Issa is going for the throat. That HE investigates unendingly and comes up empty is, IMHO, the best indicator there's no there there.
Being a so-called "entrenched enemy" is not in and of itself reason to cast doubt on their efforts; an attempt to cover-up the debacle is plainly evident. Whether the Obama administration is only guilty of misinforming the public and going the bad PR route, or let diplomats get killed due to gross incompetence has yet to be determined... the full scope of evidence has yet to be presented. It's a fact-finding investigation, not a prosecution.
…if only informed people were allowed to vote… …we would also be giving up what should be “by the people, for the people.”
Why? The only thing preventing you from being informed is your own laziness.
If you’re too lazy to study for a test, you fail it. If you’re too lazy to practice driving, you don’t get a driving license. If you’re too lazy to educate yourself on how your government operates and the beliefs of those running for office…
…we will need to demolish our two-party system…
Eh, I don’t think that needs to happen. Politics does seem to be more a triangle of belief than a line, though.
If you’re too lazy to study for a test, you fail it. If you’re too lazy to practice driving, you don’t get a driving license. If you’re too lazy to educate yourself on how your government operates and the beliefs of those running for office…
Eh, I don’t think that needs to happen. Politics does seem to be more a triangle of belief than a line, though.
Actually, you brought up an interesting point. I think it would be great if people were required to take the same exams that anyone applying for citizenship are required to take, when registering to vote. I really believe that immigrants (legal of course) very often make better citizens than many of us, who take it for granted.
And speaking of being informed: surely you understand how astronomical the odds are against a third party candidate vs. the other two. The reason? Hands down, it's campaign funds. Running for office is incredibly expensive, even for local/regional candidates. Big money donations gravitate almost entirely towards Democrats and Republicans. Special interests have already lined the pockets of the Big Two so they can more readily get their message to the public... low information voters will predictably just pick a color. And it goes without saying that when you're a special interest money man who stuffs a politician's pockets, you're going to expect a return on your investment.
Actually, you brought up an interesting point. I think it would be great if people were required to take the same exams that anyone applying for citizenship are required to take, when registering to vote. I really believe that immigrants (legal of course) very often make better citizens than many of us, who take it for granted.
Little anecdote: Nikola Tesla kept his patents in a desk drawer and his proof of American citizenship in a safe.
Actually, you brought up an interesting point. I think it would be great if people were required to take the same exams that anyone applying for citizenship are required to take, when registering to vote.
While I agree whole heatedly good luck with that. I'd be happy if we could just make people prove who they are when they come to vote. May be if we required the same ID used for government handouts; welfare, food stamps, healthcare...
Obama has a lot of faults; the biggest one being his extraordinary level of dishonesty, as well as broken promises to the American public. Can't blame a guy for trying, but you can blame a guy whose only intent is to play a strictly partisan game, fiat via blank check diplomacy and immovable even when popular opinion is overwhelmingly against his agenda.
Obama was named Liar of the Year, as noted. That's a fact.
Liar of the year by who? Politifact? Like I said it doesn't matter what the facts are nothing will change your view. Solyndra was a mistake, but it was not the only loan given to green initiatives & most of them have been successful. Do you think that there has never been Government investment in future technologies?
You seem to think the world works in a vacuum. That nothing done in previous administrations affects the present or future administrations. So no one can bring up any of those issues that have bled into this administration & of course everyone is stupid that doesn't agree with you & should take a test before they can vote. What agenda are you speaking about specifically that "popular opinion" was overwhelmingly against? Popular opinion wants some sort of reasonable change in the gun laws, popular opinion wants immigration reform, popular opinion is okay with gay civil rights, popular opinion wants an increase in the minimum wage, popular opinion believes in equal pay, popular opinion believes in closing loopholes in the tax code & tax reform etc.
Quote
Your point being what - that Obama never was, nor ever will be as popular as Bush?
The 92% was right after 911. The country was behind him, rightfully so, & he had a perfect opportunity to bring the country together going forward. He blew it. The poll that I posted show Bush's lowest approval rating at 9% (7th or 8th year into his Presidency , not sure), you seem to only see the higher rating & decided to look at it that way, but of course that isn't spin. 39% is higher than 9% so guess with your logic Bush "Is the worst President of all time". The other point was you can always find a poll that contradicts another poll. It's a snapshot in time.
I believe that the two party system should go away also & politicians should say what they think & let the chips fall where they may, but if you think Ralph Nader could handle this Congress you are naive. It would have been great to hear what he had to say in the debates. I think they should have let him enter that discussion. I thought he was making a lot of sense, but governing & debating are two different beasts.
Being a so-called "entrenched enemy" is not in and of itself reason to cast doubt on their efforts; an attempt to cover-up the debacle is plainly evident. Whether the Obama administration is only guilty of misinforming the public and going the bad PR route, or let diplomats get killed due to gross incompetence has yet to be determined... the full scope of evidence has yet to be presented. It's a fact-finding investigation, not a prosecution.
Far from casting doubt on Issa's efforts I'm using his proven track record of opposition to reinforce that after these multiple hearings and endless investigations were there a there there he'd have found it and released it at the top of his lungs. And he hasn't.
Since Issa is an opponent, and a powerful and resourceful one as well, House Committee chairmen aren't impotent, it is precisely some one who is an entrenched enemy of the administration who would be the least likely to lie to cover up some malfeasance on the part of the administration in relation to Benghazi. Carney might spin, Clinton might downplay but Issa is going for the throat. That HE investigates unendingly and comes up empty is, IMHO, the best indicator there's no there there.
Having an opponent is not an indicator of innocence. Some information is still being withheld; you're projecting your beliefs on facts that have yet to be presented. The "entrenched enemy" language you like throwing around is exactly what a thin-skinned administration would say about anyone opposed to their initiatives. And Carney didn't just spin, he flat out lied, repeatedly.
Comments
Why do all the other posts in this thread get deleted & we continually see this. Yeah, it's all Obama's fault. Feel better!
It doesn't matter what the truth or any documented historical facts are you wouldn't believe it anyway.
Obama has a lot of faults; the biggest one being his extraordinary level of dishonesty, as well as broken promises to the American public. Can't blame a guy for trying, but you can blame a guy whose only intent is to play a strictly partisan game, fiat via blank check diplomacy and immovable even when popular opinion is overwhelmingly against his agenda.
Obama was named Liar of the Year, as noted. That's a fact. He was also recently polled as the worst President in history since Hoover. Hoover! the Prez who took the blame for the not getting us out of the Great Depression! (so yep, even worse than Bush) That's also a fact. I've studied the Presidents more than enough to know that it can take a couple of generations to fully assess how well a POTUS performed in office, but right now it is not looking good for #44. I'm not going to say that what would save his legacy is kowtowing to Congress, but he is going to have to learn to work with them, and I don't think he's capable of doing that... initiatives from the House and Executive are bound to stay stuck in neutral, very similar to the Carter era.
Blame-shifting? Face the facts. For years we had to listen to 'President' Cheney's press secretaries awkwardly explain our involvement in two horrid wars and the collapse of our economy. The recent fabricated 'scandals' of the Obama administration pale in comparison.
How ironic the current press speaker is named 'Earnest'! He can't possibly be 'earnest' working for this administration, right? The Republican scandal machine is working feverishly to convince the electorate that this is one of the worst Presidents we've had in history, and you've bought into their message completely. Congratulations on relinquishing your right to interpret what is happening in Washington, and giving in to the vagaries of the Murdoch/Fox/Koch Bros. plan for a more 'Prosperous' America. Just face it, you can't stand our current President. Your lame justifications are laughable.
The topic of this thread is about Jay Carney, who was part of the Obama administration. The Bush administration left office several years ago; and you nearly put me to sleep with that tired old "blame Bush" meme (Obama's favorite fallback, of course... some people just can't be accountable for their own failings, can they?) So, YEP. Blame-shifting is all this administration knows.
As mentioned, Obama was named Liar of the Year, by a news outlet that has typically been pretty favorable to him. Which - back to topic - never really boded well for the suggestion that Carney would be an acceptable PR man for Apple. And considering who we're talking about, whether you can even process it or not, a guy named Earnest who is the front man for this administration is very ironic.
Leave it to the fanboys who voted this guy into office - with whom media outlets have almost entirely had a love affair with over the past several years - to cry fowl when multiple polls demonstrate that the skies don't actually part every time he steps up to a teleprompter.
Sorry bubby, more informed folks don't need interpretation for what's going on with this administration, neither are we willing to sit through it with blinders on. What's happening in Washington is largely a problem of Obama's own ineptitude and extraordinary lack of leadership experience. Some of us simply expect someone more capable and qualified than a pigheaded community organizer for high office... enjoy the results, though. Hey, I do. Seriously! I'm all for a President who aspires to visit all of our nation's 57 states.
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
Want don't you run for President you seem to know it all!
Blame-shifting? Face the facts. For years we had to listen to 'President' Cheney's press secretaries awkwardly explain our involvement in two horrid wars and the collapse of our economy. The recent fabricated 'scandals' of the Obama administration pale in comparison.
How ironic the current press speaker is named 'Earnest'! He can't possibly be 'earnest' working for this administration, right? The Republican scandal machine is working feverishly to convince the electorate that this is one of the worst Presidents we've had in history, and you've bought into their message completely. Congratulations on relinquishing your right to interpret what is happening in Washington, and giving in to the vagaries of the Murdoch/Fox/Koch Bros. plan for a more 'Prosperous' America. Just face it, you can't stand our current President. Your lame justifications are laughable.
Awarding you the "got the buzzwords and talking points" down gold star for the day.
Your mom will be proud when you get home. If you ever leave it, that is....
PS: To be fair (a concept kinda foreign to you, but props where due), you're not that far off on trying to put a positive face on the disastrous invasion of Iraq.
The topic of this thread is about Jay Carney, who was part of the Obama administration. The Bush administration left office several years ago; and you nearly put me to sleep with that tired old "blame Bush" meme (Obama's favorite fallback, of course... some people just can't be accountable for their own failings, can they?) So, YEP. Blame-shifting is all this administration knows.
As mentioned, Obama was named Liar of the Year, by a news outlet that has typically been pretty favorable to him. Which - back to topic - never really boded well for the suggestion that Carney would be an acceptable PR man for Apple. And considering who we're talking about, whether you can even process it or not, a guy named Earnest who is the front man for this administration is very ironic.
Leave it to the fanboys who voted this guy into office - with whom media outlets have almost entirely had a love affair with over the past several years - to cry fowl when multiple polls demonstrate that the skies don't actually part every time he steps up to a teleprompter.
Sorry bubby, more informed folks don't need interpretation for what's going on with this administration, neither are we willing to sit through it with blinders on. What's happening in Washington is largely a problem of Obama's own ineptitude and extraordinary lack of leadership experience. Some of us simply expect someone more capable and qualified than a pigheaded community organizer for high office... enjoy the results, though. Hey, I do. Seriously! I'm all for a President who aspires to visit all of our nation's 57 states.
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
What are the Republicans in congress approval ratings?
http://www.pollingreport.com/cong_rep.htm
Approval ratings of presidents highs & lows:
http://www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/data_access/data/presidential_approval.html
Doesn't Congress have to pass a bill in order for the President to sign it? I wonder if you even have a clue as to how Government works.
As far as blame shifting goes the Bush administration did plenty of damage & should take responsibility for that. That's not blame shifting. Thanks for the Frank Luntz marketing buzzwords! Yes it is the President's responsibility to deal with the problems, but Congress has just as much of an obligation to this country. Look at the Highway's in this country Republican's can't even get their act together on that. The national Highway system can be accredited to Eisenhower (a Republican) funding of it's upkeep & infrastructure funding have usually been a non-partisan issue.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/house-highway-bill-deadline-looms-24561806
Thanks for a bunch of truncated YouTube videos with no context that prove nothing.
Solyndra: Umm he was talking about the loan guarantee program not Solyndra loan itself, but of course that doesn't fit your talking points. Funny I didn't hear Bush's name at all.
57 states! Wow no other President's or presidential candidates make mistakes! Thanks again for the short video!
Like I said it doesn't matter what reality is or historical fact you will never believe it.
Right, politicians never lie, spin or cover up serious mistakes. Just like multiple hard drives with sensitive emails are absolutely prone to simultaneously spontaneously implode. There is NO corruption in government! None whatsover… that Watergate thing? Pure fiction.
Obviously you are content to completely ignore the context of my previous comment inasmuch as you enjoy whistling past the graveyard, but I will keep my money exactly where it should be: following the paper trail, rather than spare embarassment to a seriously incompetent administration.
Since Issa is an opponent, and a powerful and resourceful one as well, House Committee chairmen aren't impotent, it is precisely some one who is an entrenched enemy of the administration who would be the least likely to lie to cover up some malfeasance on the part of the administration in relation to Benghazi. Carney might spin, Clinton might downplay but Issa is going for the throat. That HE investigates unendingly and comes up empty is, IMHO, the best indicator there's no there there.
So you spew rhetoric of delusion while deluding yourself to the thought that everyone is wrong if they disagree with you?
Seems pretty stupid, but hey.
Yeah, that's what I'm doing. There were postings here from both sides of the discussion that were deleted. Have anything intelligent to say? I sure you agree with all human beings on the planet because you are a special little snowflake (in your mind). Stop putting words in my mouth. I'm sure that's a problem for you with all the voices going on in your head. Here as an example of another poster that had a different point of view than mine: (Howie) Hey, AI! Why did you delete my post? Didn't like the political message? Thanks for defending the First Amendment!
You know what I said about salt in another post of mine to you it still applies.
Doesn't Congress have to pass a bill in order for the President to sign it? I wonder if you even have a clue as to how Government works.
I’d wonder if you had a clue what he was talking about, but I already know you don’t; I don’t need to wonder.
As far as blame shifting goes the Bush administration did plenty of damage & should take responsibility for that. That's not blame shifting.
You’re right. Unfortunately, the discussion at hand doesn’t concern them.
Like I said it doesn't matter what reality is or historical fact you will never believe it.
Ah, irony.
You know what I said about salt in another post of mine to you it still applies.
That your posts should be taken with a grain of salt, perhaps? Phew! That’s a relief. I was afraid all the words you were typing about absolutely nothing on topic were supposed to be taken seriously.
What are the Republicans in congress approval ratings?
http://www.pollingreport.com/cong_rep.htm
LOL! Pretty much the same as Democrats.
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" /> Which is meaningless point to make anyway, since both sides of the aisle are not only fairly well linked up in ratings, but typically low, historically. And I know that Congress' role is not to just sign blank checks so that Obama can do whatever he wants, no questions asked. Don't you?
Approval ratings of presidents highs & lows:
Your point being what - that Obama never was, nor ever will be as popular as Bush?
Thanks for a bunch of truncated YouTube videos with no context that prove nothing.
Solyndra: Umm he was talking about the loan guarantee program not Solyndra loan itself, but of course that doesn't fit your talking points.
The videos that demonstrate Obama's own confusion and deception are self-evident. One of them shows him willing to not only pass the blame for having p*ssed away half a billion dollars, but do that with a bald-faced lie. The loan guarantee does, what? Guarantee a loan!!! Obama's administration was fully engaged in throwing money at a pie in the sky project, without Republican support. Which of course they tried to spin their way out of later when Solyndra folded. There is plenty of context in my references, and your refusal of reality is puerile and asinine.
And within that is an opportunity to contribute to the intended topic of discussion: Carney was on hand to provide the standard dose of White House spin and subterfuge.
57 states! Wow no other President's or presidential candidates make mistakes!
Yep, we're talking basic info from a 4th grade lesson plan, here. Ain't no getting around that embarrassment! Maybe he could take a page from his own book on foreign policy and try to avoid "saying stupid s#!t".
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
Isn’t it 3% for Congress overall? Why aren’t we arresting people left and right? Why will nothing change this November? If people really care this little, shouldn’t voting be reduced to the competent only?
Agreed (mostly). While it's fair to say that if only informed people were allowed to vote, we would have a more competent government that would be much more accountable than it ever has been... though we would also be giving up what should be "by the people, for the people."
Jefferson and Jackson both brought out Democracy in its most spirited form by way of unruly mobs, inasmuch as Democrats these days have an overabundance of useful idiots on hand.
I would love to believe that we can get real change (for the betterment of the general population rather than a prescribed demographic) from our politicians, and not a bunch of campaign slogans and empty promises... we will need to demolish our two-party system of corruption and business-as-usual in order for that to happen, though. I wish that Ralph Nader had not been chased away from the Presidential Debates under threat of arrest. And that Gary Johnson had gotten his 5%. But that is unfortunately what we're locked in to these days.
Since Issa is an opponent, and a powerful and resourceful one as well, House Committee chairmen aren't impotent, it is precisely some one who is an entrenched enemy of the administration who would be the least likely to lie to cover up some malfeasance on the part of the administration in relation to Benghazi. Carney might spin, Clinton might downplay but Issa is going for the throat. That HE investigates unendingly and comes up empty is, IMHO, the best indicator there's no there there.
Being a so-called "entrenched enemy" is not in and of itself reason to cast doubt on their efforts; an attempt to cover-up the debacle is plainly evident. Whether the Obama administration is only guilty of misinforming the public and going the bad PR route, or let diplomats get killed due to gross incompetence has yet to be determined... the full scope of evidence has yet to be presented. It's a fact-finding investigation, not a prosecution.
Why? The only thing preventing you from being informed is your own laziness.
If you’re too lazy to study for a test, you fail it. If you’re too lazy to practice driving, you don’t get a driving license. If you’re too lazy to educate yourself on how your government operates and the beliefs of those running for office…
Eh, I don’t think that needs to happen. Politics does seem to be more a triangle of belief than a line, though.
If you’re too lazy to study for a test, you fail it. If you’re too lazy to practice driving, you don’t get a driving license. If you’re too lazy to educate yourself on how your government operates and the beliefs of those running for office…
Eh, I don’t think that needs to happen. Politics does seem to be more a triangle of belief than a line, though.
Actually, you brought up an interesting point. I think it would be great if people were required to take the same exams that anyone applying for citizenship are required to take, when registering to vote. I really believe that immigrants (legal of course) very often make better citizens than many of us, who take it for granted.
And speaking of being informed: surely you understand how astronomical the odds are against a third party candidate vs. the other two. The reason? Hands down, it's campaign funds. Running for office is incredibly expensive, even for local/regional candidates. Big money donations gravitate almost entirely towards Democrats and Republicans. Special interests have already lined the pockets of the Big Two so they can more readily get their message to the public... low information voters will predictably just pick a color. And it goes without saying that when you're a special interest money man who stuffs a politician's pockets, you're going to expect a return on your investment.
There is a very specific reason why Obama continues to campaign for funds, and also why McCain cried fowl when Obama rejected public funds in 2008: He was handily out-financed, 2 to 1.
Little anecdote: Nikola Tesla kept his patents in a desk drawer and his proof of American citizenship in a safe.
While I agree whole heatedly good luck with that. I'd be happy if we could just make people prove who they are when they come to vote. May be if we required the same ID used for government handouts; welfare, food stamps, healthcare...
Obama has a lot of faults; the biggest one being his extraordinary level of dishonesty, as well as broken promises to the American public. Can't blame a guy for trying, but you can blame a guy whose only intent is to play a strictly partisan game, fiat via blank check diplomacy and immovable even when popular opinion is overwhelmingly against his agenda.
Obama was named Liar of the Year, as noted. That's a fact.
Liar of the year by who? Politifact? Like I said it doesn't matter what the facts are nothing will change your view. Solyndra was a mistake, but it was not the only loan given to green initiatives & most of them have been successful. Do you think that there has never been Government investment in future technologies?
You seem to think the world works in a vacuum. That nothing done in previous administrations affects the present or future administrations. So no one can bring up any of those issues that have bled into this administration & of course everyone is stupid that doesn't agree with you & should take a test before they can vote. What agenda are you speaking about specifically that "popular opinion" was overwhelmingly against? Popular opinion wants some sort of reasonable change in the gun laws, popular opinion wants immigration reform, popular opinion is okay with gay civil rights, popular opinion wants an increase in the minimum wage, popular opinion believes in equal pay, popular opinion believes in closing loopholes in the tax code & tax reform etc.
Your point being what - that Obama never was, nor ever will be as popular as Bush?
The 92% was right after 911. The country was behind him, rightfully so, & he had a perfect opportunity to bring the country together going forward. He blew it. The poll that I posted show Bush's lowest approval rating at 9% (7th or 8th year into his Presidency , not sure), you seem to only see the higher rating & decided to look at it that way, but of course that isn't spin. 39% is higher than 9% so guess with your logic Bush "Is the worst President of all time". The other point was you can always find a poll that contradicts another poll. It's a snapshot in time.
I believe that the two party system should go away also & politicians should say what they think & let the chips fall where they may, but if you think Ralph Nader could handle this Congress you are naive. It would have been great to hear what he had to say in the debates. I think they should have let him enter that discussion. I thought he was making a lot of sense, but governing & debating are two different beasts.
Being a so-called "entrenched enemy" is not in and of itself reason to cast doubt on their efforts; an attempt to cover-up the debacle is plainly evident. Whether the Obama administration is only guilty of misinforming the public and going the bad PR route, or let diplomats get killed due to gross incompetence has yet to be determined... the full scope of evidence has yet to be presented. It's a fact-finding investigation, not a prosecution.
Far from casting doubt on Issa's efforts I'm using his proven track record of opposition to reinforce that after these multiple hearings and endless investigations were there a there there he'd have found it and released it at the top of his lungs. And he hasn't.
Hadn't realised so many people posted under your name. ????
Since Issa is an opponent, and a powerful and resourceful one as well, House Committee chairmen aren't impotent, it is precisely some one who is an entrenched enemy of the administration who would be the least likely to lie to cover up some malfeasance on the part of the administration in relation to Benghazi. Carney might spin, Clinton might downplay but Issa is going for the throat. That HE investigates unendingly and comes up empty is, IMHO, the best indicator there's no there there.
Having an opponent is not an indicator of innocence. Some information is still being withheld; you're projecting your beliefs on facts that have yet to be presented. The "entrenched enemy" language you like throwing around is exactly what a thin-skinned administration would say about anyone opposed to their initiatives. And Carney didn't just spin, he flat out lied, repeatedly.