The President Obama Thread: "Election Year" Edition II

[MessiahDecoy123]

I do think it's a stretch to say socialism wouldn't exist without Marx. Some socialistic practices were the norm before Marx started writing.

There's a reason why Communism usually ends the way it does, no matter where it starts. Humans suck, and a few despots will always try to take over.

Doesn't help that Marx was fundamentally wrong about human nature.

Completely state controlled economies is where Marx was wrong, a welfare state that served a happy working class was where he was right.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democracy

 

[BritishChap007]

Haha the Republicans are so desperate they're reaching before Obama's presidency for dirt.

You're a tool.

You believe whatever you're fed. Oh yeah, nothing to see here. We kinda covered it in 2007, so that should be good enough for you right-wing nutjobs. And as for the parts we conveniently ignored, HEY--it happened in freakin' 2007, man--OLD NEWS. Awfully convenient.

What is being exposed here is not that the President is what we knew he was, but that media isn't what it purports to be. It. Did. Not. Report. On. This.

 

[Schlosser85]

You're a tool.

You believe whatever you're fed. Oh yeah, nothing to see here. We kinda covered it in 2007, so that should be good enough for you right-wing nutjobs. And as for the parts we conveniently ignored, HEY--it happened in freakin' 2007, man--OLD NEWS. Awfully convenient.

What is being exposed here is not that the President is what we knew he was, but that media isn't what it purports to be. It. Did. Not. Report. On. This.

Knock off the personal insults.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

You're a tool.

You believe whatever you're fed. Oh yeah, nothing to see here. We kinda covered it in 2007, so that should be good enough for you right-wing nutjobs. And as for the parts we conveniently ignored, HEY--it happened in freakin' 2007, man--OLD NEWS. Awfully convenient.

What is being exposed here is not that the President is what we knew he was, but that media isn't what it purports to be. It. Did. Not. Report. On. This.

lol, I'm the tool?

Sorry but I'm not the one making a huge deal over something because it's been pre-packaged as such by right wing think tanks.

It didn't work to paint the president a 60's terrorist (Ayers), a communist, or a Muslim so lets try Black Panther. That's like all of them combined so it has to work, right?

lmao, good luck with that.

 

[Thundercrack85]

Wait, what's the controversy now?

 

[Marvolo]

Wait, what's the controversy now?

Something about the latest Obama video. In 2007 he was channeling his Black Panther pride or some such thing.

 

[Hotwire]

You're a tool.

You believe whatever you're fed. Oh yeah, nothing to see here. We kinda covered it in 2007, so that should be good enough for you right-wing nutjobs. And as for the parts we conveniently ignored, HEY--it happened in freakin' 2007, man--OLD NEWS. Awfully convenient.

What is being exposed here is not that the President is what we knew he was, but that media isn't what it purports to be. It. Did. Not. Report. On. This.

One of my cousin's posting a picture on Facebook today about drinking Obama's Kool-Aid making you stupid. I'm going to give you the exact response I gave her.

What makes us "stupid" has nothing to do with who the President is, at all. It has to do with not thinking for ourselves. By simply parroting what Fox News, or MSNBC, or whoever and not bothering to research the facts ourselves, we are, in a way, all drinking the proverbial Kool-Aid, regardless of your party affiliation. The only difference is the flavor. Blindly following Obama's opposition doesn't make you any better than those who blindly follow Obama.

The point is, you seem to be doing the exact same thing you are admonishing MessiahDecoy for. You are believing what you're fed. The only difference between the two of you, is who's doing the serving.

Personally, this video is simply being used to try and dig up dirt that didn't stick back in '07 and they're hoping it will stick this time. And, I agree with MessiahDecoy, it's sad that they have to go back 5 years for their ammo to shoot down "the worst President in history".

 

[Thundercrack85]

Wait, they know he's black right? Thought we went over that in 2008.

Well, technically he's biracial, not that anyone cares.

 

[Marvolo]

Wait, they know he's black right? Thought we went over that in 2008.

Well, technically he's biracial, not that anyone cares.

Romney is practically giving the election away so they are getting desperate.

 

[TheVileOne]

I don't see how it's any worse than what Democrats have tried doing to Romney.

Obama and the White House said it was a stupid film that caused the Embassy attacks.

 

[Marvolo]

I don't see how it's any worse than what Democrats have tried doing to Romney.

Obama and the White House said it was a stupid film that caused the Embassy attacks.

Last i checked the democrats did not link that film to Romney.

 

[Thundercrack85]

No, but the White House's response to the attacks in Libya have been downright bizarre. Saying it was a spontaneous response to a youtube video, when everyone else (including people in the government) say it was a pre-meditated terrorist attack.

 

[Marvolo]

No, but the White House's response to the attacks in Libya have been downright bizarre. Saying it was a spontaneous response to a youtube video, when everyone else (including people in the government) say it was a pre-meditated terrorist attack.

It has been odd, and I'm not sure why they would continue with that story. It would seem it would be better to blame it on terrorist to further the notion that we must continue the fight, but then again admiting a terrorist attack killed a US ambassador, and 3 other americans may not be a good strategy for the administration looking to win reelection. That is the only explanation I can think of.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

Lost Obama Speech from 2007

I didn't see anything in that video that was really inciteful or out of line.

 

[Fading]

I don't see how it's any worse than what Democrats have tried doing to Romney.

Obama and the White House said it was a stupid film that caused the Embassy attacks.

I think it's the tone. Questioning policies, and decisions is ok when you present a reasonable counter point. Questioning someone based on skin color, or atleast hinting at it isn't.

I definitely don't agree with all of Obama's policies, but last election cycle started something disgusting. The, "He pals around with terrorists", is a Muslim, not American, not us, an "other", it's disgusting.

Romney jumped at foreign affair issues early, and stuck his foot in his mouth, looking unpresidential. Obama isn't mentioning the true issues from Libya. Those deserve genuine debate. Another, "Obama is really a...fill in the blank...", has no place in a civilized political discourse among grown ups.

Side note, only commenting based on you guy's talking. I haven't seen the video yet, and wasn't directing this towards anyone. Just in case.

 

[SV Fan]

You believe whatever you're fed. Oh yeah, nothing to see here. We kinda covered it in 2007, so that should be good enough for you right-wing nutjobs. And as for the parts we conveniently ignored, HEY--it happened in freakin' 2007, man--OLD NEWS. Awfully convenient.

It should be pointed out the guy who "found" this video that has been available for years(Sean Hannity) when commenting on the 47% tape he told his audience that happened "Waaaaaaaaaay back in May", in the case of this Obama tape it happened more then 5 Mays ago. lol

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

I don't see how a admitting the ambassadors death was a terrorist attack would hurt Obama.

It's not like 9-11 hurt Bush Jr. In fact it might of been the only reason he was re-elected outside of having a crummy opposing candidate (Kerry).

 

[chaseter]

Haha the Republicans are so desperate they're reaching before Obama's presidency for dirt.

No one finds it odd that all of these old Obama tapes are just now being found by the media? It's like 4 years ago they didn't try to find everything on him they could.

 

[Hotwire]

It should be pointed out the guy who "found" this video that has been available for years(Sean Hannity) when commenting on the 47% tape he told his audience that happened "Waaaaaaaaaay back in May", in the case of this Obama tape it happened more then 5 Mays ago. lol

To paraphrase the great Jon Stewart!

 

[mrvlknight21]

Lost Obama Speech from 2007

Wow. I wish this had come out prior to the 2008 election, although...it still wouldnt have mattered. He wouls have still been elected.

 

[chaseter]

I don't think Sean Hannity found the tape. He's not that clever.

 

[SV Fan]

I don't think Sean Hannity found the tape. He's not that clever.

He didn't find it but he was the one to "break" the tape.

 

[chaseter]

Which is perplexing as to why it wasn't found 4 years ago by the media sleuths.

 

[Pink Ranger]

Which is perplexing as to why it wasn't found 4 years ago by the media sleuths.

It probably was. But unfortunately, it was a double edged sword for the McCain campaign: while it has Obama saying some controversial things, it also basically puts the federal government's mishandling of the Katrina relief efforts to the forefront. I'd bet that the McCain camp felt it would do more damage to their campaign than Obama's, at the time.

Now, perhaps it is not so much a double-edged sword for Republicans, though it still has the potential to backfire on them if used improperly.

 

[Kelly]

It probably was. But unfortunately, it was a double edged sword for the McCain campaign: while it has Obama saying some controversial things, it also basically puts the federal government's mishandling of the Katrina relief efforts to the forefront. I'd bet that the McCain camp felt it would do more damage to their campaign than Obama's, at the time.

Now, perhaps it is not so much a double-edged sword for Republicans, though it still has the potential to backfire on them if used improperly.

While that is a possibility.....there are a lot, and I mean A LOT of falsehoods that have gone around about how Katrina was handled, and this speech simply continued those falsehoods...

The GOVERNOR, of ANY STATE, has to ASK....within a certain amount of time for funding afterwards....LOUISIANA DIDN'T, Mississippi and Albama DID....AND THEY GOT THE FUNDING.

THE GOVERNOR of Louisiana did not ask UNTIL THE DAY OF THE STORM for Federal help, as in FEMA, etc...therefore FEMA was not in place until days after the storm.

As much as people would like to blame the Federal Government for the mistakes of Katrina....it is THE STATE OF LOUISIANA that holds the majority of the blame. No matter how stupid we think the bureaucracy is???? THE STATE, has to officially ask for the help, or they will not get it....that is just how it is.....if you look at the phone logs from the President....he was constantly, constantly, constantly calling asking if Louisiana had contacted them for the necessary help. THEY (LOUISIANA) didn't....

TEXAS DID for Ike and it worked as well as it could have....
MISSISSIPPI AND ALABAMA did for Katrina, and it worked as well as it could have...

Here is the lesson learned by Louisiana, AND THEY LEARNED IT......it showed in this last Hurricane....

"ask and you shall receive....." "miss the deadline for asking AFTERWARDS, and you shall not receive...."

Bush stated, that the "buck stopped with him, on Katrina" and that is how it should be, but the Governor of Louisiana and the Mayor of New Orleans, truly are the ones that hold the majority of the blame. Bush simply took the bullet for them.