erynthered Posted February 27, 2009 Posted February 27, 2009 The Democrats wanted Bush to lose the war in Iraq so badly on his watch. The numorus votes for immediate withdrawal etc. NOW, there's no way they want a Democrat to be saddled with losing the war in Iraq. Politics as usual. Whats Murtha saying about this I wonder.
Chef Jim Posted February 27, 2009 Posted February 27, 2009 Holding him to promises he made about the Iraq war when his intel could fit in a thimble is somewhat excusable. He honestly had no clue what he was talking about, no one pressed him on it, so it went to the wayside. Despite my political leanings, anything that came out of his mouth about Iraq was, to me, blather. However, there are some things he has promised that I completely expect him to hold up to. One was from his speech the other night: "We have launched a housing plan that will help responsible families facing the threat of foreclosure lower their monthly payments and refinance their mortgages. It's a plan that won't help speculators or that neighbor down the street who bought a house he could never hope to afford, but it will help millions of Americans who are struggling with declining home values." That's very important to me, and I look forward to him keeping that promise. Sorry Marc but pulling out $100k in equity to build the ultimate backyard bbq/tiki bar (though cool as it is) hardly falls under the category of being responsible. You're shiit out of luck.
IDBillzFan Posted February 27, 2009 Posted February 27, 2009 A large portion of the people who like him and voted for him don't actually listen to him either. That's not his or my fault. The funny point to me, is that what he has always said he would do, and what he just did, was exactly what you would want a President to do. Have a plan and a strong opinion about that plan. Tell the people on the ground and your commanders and joint chiefs and security team to see how they can put that plan into action, but be reasonable and not too strict about it. Listen to them when they come back with their report, and then adjust your plan and wishes accordingly. The commanders thought 16 months was too quick, and the 30,000 or so troops that Obama wanted originally to keep there was too few. So he compromised, they agreed they could do this, and now they are instituting it. That's a leader in my book. You know, this post needs a
Chef Jim Posted February 27, 2009 Posted February 27, 2009 http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/ I think I've found my new homepage.
Chef Jim Posted February 27, 2009 Posted February 27, 2009 You know, this post needs a I re-read the post to that music....you know it is much better, thanks for the enhancement.
IDBillzFan Posted February 27, 2009 Posted February 27, 2009 Sorry Marc but pulling out $100k in equity to build the ultimate backyard bbq/tiki bar (though cool as it is) hardly falls under the category of being responsible. You're shiit out of luck. First of all, it didn't cost $100K. It only cost $70K. And second of all, I didn't pay for it with an equity line. Kelly the Fair and Balanced Dog gave it to me, and he doesn't even expect it back.
Kelly the Dog Posted February 27, 2009 Posted February 27, 2009 I think I've found my new homepage. It's a great site and not at all partisan either way. Also looks to me like he's doing a great job so far.
Chef Jim Posted February 27, 2009 Posted February 27, 2009 It's a great site and not at all partisan either way. Also looks to me like he's doing a great job so far. To me, with no action on 460 promises, it looks like he's doing no job.
RkFast Posted February 27, 2009 Posted February 27, 2009 Technically, we've never withdrawn our troops from Europe after WWII either. I guess. Or Korea, or Okinawa, etc.
Kelly the Dog Posted February 27, 2009 Posted February 27, 2009 You know, this post needs a Do you want to refute any part of the actual post? You're as partisan as friggin molson. You're lucky you're friggin' funny a lot of the time because otherwise you'd be intolerable.
Chalkie Gerzowski Posted February 27, 2009 Posted February 27, 2009 It's enough to establish martial law here though
IDBillzFan Posted February 27, 2009 Posted February 27, 2009 Do you want to refute any part of the actual post? You're as partisan as friggin molson. You're lucky you're friggin' funny a lot of the time because otherwise you'd be intolerable. Thank god you have a sense of humor. We had this discussion a long time ago. One of Obama's strongest traits is understanding the strength of the difference between things implied and things inferred. He walks that line better than most, and I know because I spent nine years working for a man who was one of the best at it. In the end, though, even when the person can honestly say "No, go back and listen to what I said and you'll see I am being honest," people still walk away feeling tricked or cheated.
Chef Jim Posted February 27, 2009 Posted February 27, 2009 Thank god you have a sense of humor. We had this discussion a long time ago. One of Obama's strongest traits is understanding the strength of the difference between things implied and things inferred. He walks that line better than most, and I know because I spent nine years working for a man who was one of the best at it. In the end, though, even when the person can honestly say "No, go back and listen to what I said and you'll see I am being honest," people still walk away feeling tricked or cheated. And it's the look on their face when they tell you to go back and listen. I know the type...I hang out with lawyers.
John Adams Posted February 27, 2009 Author Posted February 27, 2009 However, there are some things he has promised that I completely expect him to hold up to. One was from his speech the other night:"We have launched a housing plan that will help responsible families facing the threat of foreclosure lower their monthly payments and refinance their mortgages. It's a plan that won't help speculators or that neighbor down the street who bought a house he could never hope to afford, but it will help millions of Americans who are struggling with declining home values." That's very important to me, and I look forward to him keeping that promise. Yeah. Good luck with that. Here's how the system should work: If you can't afford your house, you have to give it up. But the Obama system works like this: if you can't afford your house, John Adams is forced to rescue you. What a crock of siht. My home value is now probably close to upside-down underwater or whatever but I can afford the payment, so I'll stay put. If for some reason I eventually can't, I'll have to move. Will that be a great day? No. Will it be the end of the world? No. Why does the government have to intervene to save me?
blzrul Posted February 27, 2009 Posted February 27, 2009 What I've read and what I heard today is a range of 35-50k which is an improvement over 130k with people continually being redeployed. My guess is that announcing a pullout of every last soldier by 8/10 would not be realistic or responsible. However, I also guess that if this serves as a strong impetus for the Iraquis to get their act together, and they actually DO it, then the number will be reduced. Granted, jerking the tooth out as opposed to wiggling it for days is usually less painful. But I am sure that this decision was made after much consultation with the military and is probably the best of a lot of bad alternatives. Pull everyone else out immediately, and watch the extremists take over. Stay 100 years. This is an interim step which will get us out sooner than we would have with "President McCain's" 100-year war. Besides, we all love to watch Nancy Pelosi wig out.
BuckyFillUps Posted February 27, 2009 Posted February 27, 2009 Who are you talking to genius? those who voted for him. I did not.
Kelly the Dog Posted February 28, 2009 Posted February 28, 2009 To me, with no action on 460 promises, it looks like he's doing no job. Yeah, because you're supposed to address and complete, in one month, everything you possibly wanted to accomplish in 8 years. Especially if on day one you're entering the worst and most complex combination of crises any President has faced in 50 years. :beer:
Chump Change Posted February 28, 2009 Posted February 28, 2009 Do you want to refute any part of the actual post? You're as partisan as friggin molson. You're lucky you're friggin' funny a lot of the time because otherwise you'd be intolerable. Kelly, you're not funny, so where does that leave you? I will say you are one hell of a cheerleader. I hope you're on the payroll.
Kelly the Dog Posted February 28, 2009 Posted February 28, 2009 http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0209/19392.html
/dev/null Posted February 28, 2009 Posted February 28, 2009 Besides, we all love to watch Nancy Pelosi wig out. Hey mods, how far back does TSW archives go before it crashed in ~07/08? For grins and giggles, I'd love to go back to the end of 06/early 07 and read up on nozzlenut's posts concerning the Democratic takeover of Congress
Recommended Posts