Obama is a Windbag

[BillsNYC]

I found the opening to this to be humorous.

 

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/iain_martin/b...oes_go_on_a_bit

[Gene Frenkle]

I found the opening to this to be humorous.

 

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/iain_martin/b...oes_go_on_a_bit

A Brit is calling someone else boring? That's cute.

 

Better than throwing shoes at him I guess.

[IDBillzFan]

I loved his speech to Turkey.

 

"I know there have been difficulties these last few years," he said. "I know that the trust that binds us has been strained, and I know that strain is shared in many places where the Muslim faith is practiced. Let me say this as clearly as I can: the United States is not at war with Islam.

Can someone help clarify for me the strain we've had with Turkey lately? Did we do something to piss off the people of Turkey lately? Was it our arrogance again? Were we arrogant toward Turkey? I missed that part of history.

[erynthered]

That threat to kill him was quite funny. Like that would ever happen to a US President.

[Kelly the Dog]

I loved his speech to Turkey.

 

 

Can someone help clarify for me the strain we've had with Turkey lately? Did we do something to piss off the people of Turkey lately? Was it our arrogance again? Were we arrogant toward Turkey? I missed that part of history.

Turkey has been pissed at us since before the Iraq war, because of the war. There has been about a dozen instances and major reasons why it has been "strained", the same words used in this link from 2005, including when Rumsfeld basically blamed Turkey for the insurgency.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,152683,00.html

 

Not to mention...

US: Islam Relations (ABCPost-3/26-29)

 

ABC News / Washington Post

3/26-29/09; 1,000 adults, 3% margin of error

Mode: Live Telephone Interviews

 

National

 

Would you say you have a generally favorable or unfavorable opinion of Islam?

 

41% Favorable

48% Unfavorable

 

How important do you think it is for Obama to try to improve U.S. relations

with Muslim nations -- very important, somewhat important, not so important or

not important at all?

 

81% Important

18% Not important

[The Big Cat]

I loved his speech to Turkey.

 

 

Can someone help clarify for me the strain we've had with Turkey lately? Did we do something to piss off the people of Turkey lately? Was it our arrogance again? Were we arrogant toward Turkey? I missed that part of history.

 

Turkey basically dictates our refusal to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide.

[IDBillzFan]

Turkey basically dictates our refusal to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide.

I thought Obama campaigned that he was going to acknowledge the genocide when he was president.

 

Well, he probably got the American Armenian vote, so that's something.

[Kelly the Dog]

Interesting article.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/07/opinion/07aydintasbas.html

[The Big Cat]

I thought Obama campaigned that he was going to acknowledge the genocide when he was president.

 

Well, he probably got the American Armenian vote, so that's something.

 

Well, my girlfriend would count thusly!

 

The very fact that he hasn't yet would demonstrate the "strains" we're all so darned skeptical of.

[Kelly the Dog]

Well, my girlfriend would count thusly!

 

The very fact that he hasn't yet would demonstrate the "strains" we're all so darned skeptical of.

He referenced his position a couple times there and said he hasn't changed it but didnt think it was appropriate to get into it there. And in the link I provided above, a Turkish journalist jumped on it and said "It wasn’t all roses, of course. In his speech to Parliament, President Obama urged Ankara to face up to the mass killings of Armenians in 1915, something most voters here object to." even though he tried to avoid it.

[IDBillzFan]

He referenced his position a couple times there and said he hasn't changed it but didnt think it was appropriate to get into it there. And in the link I provided above, a Turkish journalist jumped on it and said "It wasn’t all roses, of course. In his speech to Parliament, President Obama urged Ankara to face up to the mass killings of Armenians in 1915, something most voters here object to." even though he tried to avoid it.

Decent article by the LA Times here. Goes to what I've discussed about him for some time. He says one thing over here, does another thing over there, defends himself on semantics, and all is well with the world because he really didn't break a promise...he just changed things so it wasn't an obvious, pure break of the promise.

 

Bullwinkle politics. Nothing up my sleeve. Nothing in my hat.

 

Even the LA Times can't defend him completely, though as a conservative, I can see this article clearly has that nice, clean liberal feel of "Well if we criticize a few things, people won't accuse us of being in the bag for him."

[Kelly the Dog]

Decent article by the LA Times here. Goes to what I've discussed about him for some time. He says one thing over here, does another thing over there, defends himself on semantics, and all is well with the world because he really didn't break a promise...he just changed things so it wasn't an obvious, pure break of the promise.

 

Bullwinkle politics. Nothing up my sleeve. Nothing in my hat.

 

Even the LA Times can't defend him completely, though as a conservative, I can see this article clearly has that nice, clean liberal feel of "Well if we criticize a few things, people won't accuse us of being in the bag for him."

You don't honestly think he should have blasted them in their parliament, do you? There is a time and place for things, and that surely IMO was not the place to start accusing people. He said plainly what his position was and that he wasn't going to change it. I would have blasted him if he did that there for being completely without brains or tact. He is trying to change the dialogue with the Islamic world. It would have been entirely stupid to start a fight on his first day there.

[IDBillzFan]

You don't honestly think he should have blasted them in their parliament, do you? There is a time and place for things, and that surely IMO was not the place to start accusing people. He said plainly what his position was and that he wasn't going to change it. I would have blasted him if he did that there for being completely without brains or tact. He is trying to change the dialogue with the Islamic world. It would have been entirely stupid to start a fight on his first day there.

You are right. That was not the place to start accusing people because he already started the accusations during his campaign. Fortunately, people in Turkey don't have TVs, or the internet, so they had no idea his plan during the campaign was to call it genocide. I guess it's okay to do it here, but face-to-face with Turkey would have been stupid.

 

Quite honestly, I really don't care. My initial interest in this topic was in the comedy that he somehow found a "strain" between America and Turkey. Now that he's finishing with his Magical Apology Tour, I can't help but wonder: have we Americans ever done anything good for any other country in this world? Because I've recently been reading that we're nothing but of bunch of arrogant, greedy, selfish tools responsible for all the ills in this world. We're greedy and arrogant toward Europe, we've put "strains" on our relationship with Turkey, and we're responsible for all the bloodshed in Mexico. When he returns from the trip, do we apologize to Canada next because we failed to consider the feelings of the pilot who stole a plane in hopes we'd shoot him down? Or do we just jump to giving him an automatic work visa and adding him to the census roles in Wisconsin?

 

I'm quickly learning that the apologies across the nation, while directed at the international communities, were indirectly meant for America to understand how it should feel about itself; ashamed.

 

But he'll fix it. He'll make everything better.

 

The more I learn, the more I fear this dude's plans.

[Kelly the Dog]

I'm quickly learning that the apologies across the nation, while directed at the international communities, were indirectly meant for America to understand how it should feel about itself; ashamed.

 

But he'll fix it. He'll make everything better.

I guess now I realize why you hate him so much. You're never wrong, humble, never made a mistake, never caused any trouble for other people by your actions, and you have no reason to think you are anything but benevolent, fabulous, and both saved and rule the world. Everyone should bow down to your greatness because you're an arrogant ass and the whole world should relentlessly love you for it.

 

That's actually how you act here, and apparently what you think our leaders should do.

 

If you completely ignore the dozens of times that Obama said America is leading the world, ready to do more to lead the world, you guys need to step up, you guys have wrongly bashed us, terrorism is likely to strike you guys first and you need us, then I suppose the whole trip was apologizing, which he, of course, never did once the entire trip.

 

You have created this very convenient little device for yourself that allows you cherry pick all the horrible things you think he said or implied, and say this is what he means, and then anything that doesn't fit that description you say "oops, nothing up my sleeve" because he really doesn't mean anything good, true, or right, he just means the bad stuff.

 

You sound more and more like VA instead of LA every day. And it's pathetic.

[IDBillzFan]

You sound more and more like VA instead of LA every day. And it's pathetic.

Nice. Very nice.

 

The primary reason we differ is because we want different things from our government, and subsequently judge the current administration based on expectations.

 

I want less government in my life. You apparently want more (or you would be critical of the controlling steps this administration has taken so quickly). I want to be personally accountable for my life. I want to succeed and fail on my own, and realize that any time the government has tried to get involved in anything of significance, it gets !@#$ed up. You clearly NEED your government in your life, telling you what to do, telling you how to think, allowing you the occassional criticism so you don't completely seem like you're in the tank for it. (Yeah, that Pelosi is a nutjob!)

 

You see him standing on a world stage like a passive aggressive parent saying "Oh, he's usually a very good boy. I'm so sorry for his arrogance. And greed. And selfishness. And his carelessness. But otherwise he can be a good boy. Leave him to me. I'll fix him" and you're immediate response is "Yes, daddy. Thanks for letting me be proud again." Because that is how he needs you. Frankly, you're an easy target because you actually BELIEVE in what he does. Now you add in the poor, the illegals given free passes, and even the downtrodden middle class whose misery in life is clearly tied to the very greed and arrogance that has destroyed this country. And what do we have? Enough people who rely on the government to make their lives better in spite of the fact that it is the goverment -- regardless of party affiliation -- that is primarily CAUSING the problems in this country.

 

But no. To you, it's not really the goverment. At least not today's goverment. Today's government needs to fix yesterday's government, so more government is good. More government is NEEDED because we simply are too ignorant to take care of ourselves.

 

So let's take over the banks. Take over the car makers. Take over health care. Give illegals a free pass. Suck up to the unions. Spend beyond our means. Tax the snotshhit out of the greedy. And travel the world to apologize for the very people who actually make this country the envy of the world.

 

Yeah. I'm the pathetic one.

[erynthered]

Nice. Very nice.

 

The primary reason we differ is because we want different things from our government, and subsequently judge the current administration based on expectations.

 

I want less government in my life. You apparently want more (or you would be critical of the controlling steps this administration has taken so quickly). I want to be personally accountable for my life. I want to succeed and fail on my own, and realize that any time the government has tried to get involved in anything of significance, it gets !@#$ed up. You clearly NEED your government in your life, telling you what to do, telling you how to think, allowing you the occassional criticism so you don't completely seem like you're in the tank for it. (Yeah, that Pelosi is a nutjob!)

 

You see him standing on a world stage like a passive aggressive parent saying "Oh, he's usually a very good boy. I'm so sorry for his arrogance. And greed. And selfishness. And his carelessness. But otherwise he can be a good boy. Leave him to me. I'll fix him" and you're immediate response is "Yes, daddy. Thanks for letting me be proud again." Because that is how he needs you. Frankly, you're an easy target because you actually BELIEVE in what he does. Now you add in the poor, the illegals given free passes, and even the downtrodden middle class whose misery in life is clearly tied to the very greed and arrogance that has destroyed this country. And what do we have? Enough people who rely on the government to make their lives better in spite of the fact that it is the goverment -- regardless of party affiliation -- that is primarily CAUSING the problems in this country.

 

But no. To you, it's not really the goverment. At least not today's goverment. Today's government needs to fix yesterday's government, so more government is good. More government is NEEDED because we simply are too ignorant to take care of ourselves.

 

So let's take over the banks. Take over the car makers. Take over health care. Give illegals a free pass. Suck up to the unions. Spend beyond our means. Tax the snotshhit out of the greedy. And travel the world to apologize for the very people who actually make this country the envy of the world.

 

Yeah. I'm the pathetic one.

 

 

Col. Jessep? Is that you?

 

 

Nice post, LA.

[Kelly the Dog]

The primary reason we differ is because we want different things from our government, and subsequently judge the current administration based on expectations.

 

I want less government in my life. You apparently want more (or you would be critical of the controlling steps this administration has taken so quickly). I want to be personally accountable for my life. I want to succeed and fail on my own, and realize that any time the government has tried to get involved in anything of significance, it gets !@#$ed up. You clearly NEED your government in your life, telling you what to do, telling you how to think, allowing you the occassional criticism so you don't completely seem like you're in the tank for it. (Yeah, that Pelosi is a nutjob!)

Not even close to what I think and want. In fact, the polar opposite. I think only for myself and take everything that happens for itself. I have no expectations for my government. I want less, too. A lot less. If it were up to me, I would cut everything in the government by a third and re-evaluate, and then see if we can cut out another third. I don't need to want to be accountable in my life, I am accountable for my life, and succeed or fail on my own. The government has extremely little to do with that. I basically want them to pick up the garbage and have the busses run on time so other people are out of my way.

 

But the problem is, you can't trust the public to do the right thing. That has failed, too, as bad as the government. At these times, the government has to step in and do stuff that the public can't. It has failed miserably a lot of the time as you say, but I can't believe you hate America so much by saying we are not always great! The government has also done a lot of good and always has.

 

To me, each thing is to be looked at individually. Take Health Care for example. I don't know at all whether universal health care is good or possible or right, let alone how to get it accomplished. I do think, however, that we're the best and richest and smartest people on the planet and we should take care of people that need it. I think that we could slash the entire health care system by 40-50% and then have enough money left over to take care of everyone. But the system blows, and it's both parties as well as the greedy public's fault. You just assume I think the government should take care of everyone because I am a democrat and you're dead wrong.

You see him standing on a world stage like a passive aggressive parent saying "Oh, he's usually a very good boy. I'm so sorry for his arrogance. And greed. And selfishness. And his carelessness. But otherwise he can be a good boy. Leave him to me. I'll fix him" and you're immediate response is "Yes, daddy. Thanks for letting me be proud again." Because that is how he needs you. Frankly, you're an easy target because you actually BELIEVE in what he does. Now you add in the poor, the illegals given free passes, and even the downtrodden middle class whose misery in life is clearly tied to the very greed and arrogance that has destroyed this country. And what do we have? Enough people who rely on the government to make their lives better in spite of the fact that it is the goverment -- regardless of party affiliation -- that is primarily CAUSING the problems in this country.

That is total crap, too. I see him owning up to the fact we're wrong sometimes. We don't always do the right thing. People on the right, and you have done it repeatedly, too, think just because someone says we made a mistake that they are bowing down and think we totally suck. That's nonsense. He never even said we're sorry or we apologize, he said AT TIMES we have been arrogant and derisive and I think it's undeniable that we have.

 

I think being humble is good. I also think greed and confidence and pride is good, as long as it is kept in check. What I see in Obama, because I actually listen to him and take what he says as a whole, see a combination of saying we're the biggest and best and we will lead, but we're not always right and we made some mistakes and you people have some worth, too. And we need you like you need us. That is what he said. If you just ignore what he says, so be it. That is what I think is pathetic.

But no. To you, it's not really the goverment. At least not today's goverment. Today's government needs to fix yesterday's government, so more government is good. More government is NEEDED because we simply are too ignorant to take care of ourselves.

 

So let's take over the banks. Take over the car makers. Take over health care. Give illegals a free pass. Suck up to the unions. Spend beyond our means. Tax the snotshhit out of the greedy. And travel the world to apologize for the very people who actually make this country the envy of the world.

I don't think Obama would want anything to do with the banks or car companies or insurance companies, except that is the world he inherited on inauguration day. If you say you do, I think you're just flat lying. Just my opinion.

 

I would bet every dollar I had that his administration CAN'T WAIT until they have zero ownership of the car companies and banks and insurance companies. I guarantee you they would think that is one of the very best things that could happen to them. You seem to think it's a master plan power grab.

 

I do, however, think he's taking a big gamble. He is spending a TON of money that we don't have right now. I don't know if it is going to work out. I do like, a lot, that he is trying to fix things for good that we have been ignoring for decades and decades, like infrastructure, power, energy and education. I already said what I thought about health care and have no idea if what he is doing about that is right or wrong or otherwise. It could be terrible.

 

But to me, our difference in the way we see him is shown in a recent decision about the illegals. You jumped all over the fact that he is going after the business owners who hire them and letting the illegals go free because he loves illegals and hates Americans and hates people making money.

 

To me, this is what he is doing about education and energy and a lot of other stuff. He's looking long term. If you arrest the illegals, there are just going to be more illegals to take their place. It's a never ending cycle and it doesn't fix the systemic problem. If you stop the source, if you stop the businesses from hiring the illegals... you know, the thing that actually has to happen first, the Americans that are breaking the law... then there aren't jobs for the illegals to take. That is a long term solution not a quick fix that doesn't fix anything. It doesn't mean he hates business and loves illegals. It means he thinks that is where the long term solution lies.

[Chef Jim]

Not even close to what I think and want. In fact, the polar opposite. I think only for myself and take everything that happens for itself. I have no expectations for my government. I want less, too. A lot less. If it were up to me, I would cut everything in the government by a third and re-evaluate, and then see if we can cut out another third. I don't need to want to be accountable in my life, I am accountable for my life, and succeed or fail on my own. The government has extremely little to do with that. I basically want them to pick up the garbage and have the busses run on time so other people are out of my way.

 

But the problem is, you can't trust the public to do the right thing. That has failed, too, as bad as the government. At these times, the government has to step in and do stuff that the public can't. It has failed miserably a lot of the time as you say, but I can't believe you hate America so much by saying we are not always great! The government has also done a lot of good and always has.

 

To me, each thing is to be looked at individually. Take Health Care for example. I don't know at all whether universal health care is good or possible or right, let alone how to get it accomplished. I do think, however, that we're the best and richest and smartest people on the planet and we should take care of people that need it. I think that we could slash the entire health care system by 40-50% and then have enough money left over to take care of everyone. But the system blows, and it's both parties as well as the greedy public's fault. You just assume I think the government should take care of everyone because I am a democrat and you're dead wrong.

 

That is total crap, too. I see him owning up to the fact we're wrong sometimes. We don't always do the right thing. People on the right, and you have done it repeatedly, too, think just because someone says we made a mistake that they are bowing down and think we totally suck. That's nonsense. He never even said we're sorry or we apologize, he said AT TIMES we have been arrogant and derisive and I think it's undeniable that we have.

 

I think being humble is good. I also think greed and confidence and pride is good, as long as it is kept in check. What I see in Obama, because I actually listen to him and take what he says as a whole, see a combination of saying we're the biggest and best and we will lead, but we're not always right and we made some mistakes and you people have some worth, too. And we need you like you need us. That is what he said. If you just ignore what he says, so be it. That is what I think is pathetic.

 

I don't think Obama would want anything to do with the banks or car companies or insurance companies, except that is the world he inherited on inauguration day. If you say you do, I think you're just flat lying. Just my opinion.

 

I would bet every dollar I had that his administration CAN'T WAIT until they have zero ownership of the car companies and banks and insurance companies. I guarantee you they would think that is one of the very best things that could happen to them. You seem to think it's a master plan power grab.

 

I do, however, think he's taking a big gamble. He is spending a TON of money that we don't have right now. I don't know if it is going to work out. I do like, a lot, that he is trying to fix things for good that we have been ignoring for decades and decades, like infrastructure, power, energy and education. I already said what I thought about health care and have no idea if what he is doing about that is right or wrong or otherwise. It could be terrible.

 

But to me, our difference in the way we see him is shown in a recent decision about the illegals. You jumped all over the fact that he is going after the business owners who hire them and letting the illegals go free because he loves illegals and hates Americans and hates people making money.

 

To me, this is what he is doing about education and energy and a lot of other stuff. He's looking long term. If you arrest the illegals, there are just going to be more illegals to take their place. It's a never ending cycle and it doesn't fix the systemic problem. If you stop the source, if you stop the businesses from hiring the illegals... you know, the thing that actually has to happen first, the Americans that are breaking the law... then there aren't jobs for the illegals to take. That is a long term solution not a quick fix that doesn't fix anything. It doesn't mean he hates business and loves illegals. It means he thinks that is where the long term solution lies.

 

Sorry man I stopped right at the point you said the public can't be trusted to do the right thing but the government can. You're !@#$ing delusional.

[IDBillzFan]

Sorry man I stopped right at the point you said the public can't be trusted to do the right thing but the government can. You're !@#$ing delusional.

Same here. It's the Obama mantra. "Only the government can fix this."

[Kelly the Dog]

Sorry man I stopped right at the point you said the public can't be trusted to do the right thing but the government can. You're !@#$ing delusional.

Of course, you apparently can't read.

 

I said the public is as bad as the government, you can't trust them to do the right thing either. But the government has to step in at times, like in the fall when the economic system was about to collapse. You remember, the time when all you money guys said if you don't fix this we are totally fukked?

 

But I also said that the government in our history has done a lot of things good, too. Which it has. It's very likely the best government in the history of the world.

 

AND I said I think we should have 33-66% LESS government across the board.