The President Obama Thread: "Election Year" Edition III

[Schlosser85]

Bill Ayers hasn't been a terrorist for decades and is currently a respected college professor.

John McCain incessantly referring to him as "a washed-up old terrorist" was rather ridiculous. He's hardly "washed-up"....he just changed career paths.

 

[TheBat812]

I don't think that is exactly it....I think most of them think their entire job is to keep their job, and most seem to think that their constituents think they should oppose the other party at all times in order to keep their jobs...

Doesn't that amount to exactly the same thing? t:

 

[Kelly]

Bill Ayers hasn't been a terrorist for decades and is currently a respected college professor.

John McCain incessantly referring to him as "a washed-up old terrorist" was rather ridiculous. He's hardly "washed-up"....he just changed career paths.

This hit me so funny.....lmao.

 

[DACrowe]

I am absolutlely in favor of this. My new phlosophy is 'you have one term - plenty of time to do something good - if you don't, youre fired.' If everyone would get on board with this we could actually get bipartisan cooperation going in all houses and with the president because they would know the alternative would be losing their jobs. Sadly, the crux is what each person defines as 'doing something good' and when you have people touting what obama has done as a great success, it looks like those definitions are greatly varied. Of course those same people would be screaming to impeach over benghazi and ranting over the handling of Sandy if the current prez was a republican.

OK, I get Benghazi. It has become the battle cry of Fox News for almost two months (thus making it go from a serious blunder that should be explained to naked political opportunism in the face of tragedy). But Sandy? Really?!

What is wrong with his handling? I have not watched Fox News, so are they blaming him for the hurricane? Are they saying he acted too quickly and should have taken Bush's measured, "meh" approach? I just do not get what you are talking about.

 

[dnno1]

OK, I get Benghazi. It has become the battle cry of Fox News for almost two months (thus making it go from a serious blunder that should be explained to naked political opportunism in the face of tragedy). But Sandy? Really?!

What is wrong with his handling? I have not watched Fox News, so are they blaming him for the hurricane? Are they saying he acted too quickly and should have taken Bush's measured, "meh" approach? I just do not get what you are talking about.

I heard that members of the Republican Party asked FOX to stop talking about Benghazi and get on the hurricane angle. A lot of people have been out of power now and there's another storm coming.

 

[SuperT]

That's ridiculous! President O along with Christie and others in the area have handled the hurricane very well.

It hasn't been nearly 1/10 the disaster that was Katrina was.

 

[Spider‐Man]

OK, I get Benghazi. It has become the battle cry of Fox News for almost two months (thus making it go from a serious blunder that should be explained to naked political opportunism in the face of tragedy). But Sandy? Really?!

What is wrong with his handling? I have not watched Fox News, so are they blaming him for the hurricane? Are they saying he acted too quickly and should have taken Bush's measured, "meh" approach? I just do not get what you are talking about.

First, I don't watch Fox news.

Second, I find it extremely amusing that not until it has become clear that obama is going to get a free pass on benghazi and its not really going to hurt him in the election that you suddenly 'get it'. For the record, though nothing will ever be done, it is ultimately his failure as commander in chief why those people died. Funny how you seem to ignore the fact that obama is being just as political about it by avoiding addressing his responsibility for it. And 'serious blunder'? That's an insult to the people that died.

And finally, I never criticized his handling of Sandy. That's just you, once again, reading in. I'm saying if the situation was exactly the same only a republican president was in office it would be all about 'They just forgot about Staton Island' and 'Where the hell are the FEMA generators?!' Now do you get it?

Now, I'm sick of politics for a while so I'm going to a more enjoyable forum to discuss something much more fun. Try not to pee your pants over the next 24 hours.

Piss out.

 

[redhawk23]

^ Classy.

 

[Hotwire]

Hey guys, I need a little help. I had a friend on Facebook make the following statement, "oh yeah Mike, by the way, you have a $100 in your wallet?? if so, you have to give me $50 of it..redistribution baby, because I don'"t have any money. how's that???you like that? :eye roll:"
I asked her to back up her claim she insisted I Google it myself. Now, all the burden of proof arguments aside, does anyone else know where she got these numbers? The best thing she could come up with was to tell me to Google "www.youtube/watch Oct 24, 2008 also abcnews.go.com Sept 18, 2012 look it up!!!" Google turned up nothing other than a rebuking of the old video of Obama's redistribution comment from 1998.

 

[CConn]

I'm not even sure what you're asking.

 

[Kelly]

I'm not even sure what you're asking.

I'm going to throw a guess out there, that he's asking if there is somewhere, where it states that Obama will be taking up to 50% in taxes....or something along those lines.

 

[CConn]

So, if his friend said "hey, give me 15 bucks of your 100 because I'm broke", he'd be okay with it?

 

[Hotwire]

I'm going to throw a guess out there, that he's asking if there is somewhere, where it states that Obama will be taking up to 50% in taxes....or something along those lines.

Pretty much. I'm assuming that was the position of my friend. She seemed to imply that Obama was for taking half of someone's money to give to someone else. I was looking for proof that Obama was for redistributing half of the wealth to the poor. I couldn't find anything even remotely close and was wondering if anyone else knew anything like it.

 

[CConn]

Pretty much. I'm assuming that was the position of my friend. She seemed to imply that Obama was for taking half of someone's money to give to someone else. I was looking for proof that Obama was for redistributing half of the wealth to the poor. I couldn't find anything even remotely close and was wondering if anyone else knew anything like it.

I kinda doubt she was being that literal.

She probably was merely attempting to dispute the concept of wealth redistribution.

But I might not know what I'm talking about.

 

[Fading]

Bill Ayers hasn't been a terrorist for decades and is currently a respected college professor.

John McCain incessantly referring to him as "a washed-up old terrorist" was rather ridiculous. He's hardly "washed-up"....he just changed career paths.

Yet oddly enough, while Bill Ayers is still an issue. Ryan going to a convention, and speaking after a "former terrorist" is ok.

Even though the "former terrorist" is most likely just pretending to have been a terrorist, it's still hypocrisy at it's finest.

 

[Fading]

OK, I get Benghazi. It has become the battle cry of Fox News for almost two months (thus making it go from a serious blunder that should be explained to naked political opportunism in the face of tragedy). But Sandy? Really?!

What is wrong with his handling? I have not watched Fox News, so are they blaming him for the hurricane? Are they saying he acted too quickly and should have taken Bush's measured, "meh" approach? I just do not get what you are talking about.

That's ridiculous! President O along with Christie and others in the area have handled the hurricane very well.

It hasn't been nearly 1/10 the disaster that was Katrina was.

I'm not going to argue it, but even if he says it wasn't his attempt, he said "ranting over the handling of it". Pretty obvious way of comparing it to Katrina.

The difference being how it was handled. It's not a Democrat, or Republican thing. I don't blame Bush for Katrina, but Katrina was handled poorly, by several ppl. The only good to have come out of it was FEMA being straightened out. Sandy on the other hand was handled very well from the start, and doesn't reflect poorly on anyone.

If the argument is, "Well it doesn't matter, ppl died, and the pres is always responsible", that's sad. No matter how powerful a politician, they can't control the weather, only handle the aftermath. Obama, Christie, the emergency responders, police, fire fighters, even fellow civillians all handled Sandy as well as they could.

 

[Thundercrack85]

Bill Ayers hasn't been a terrorist for decades and is currently a respected college professor.

John McCain incessantly referring to him as "a washed-up old terrorist" was rather ridiculous. He's hardly "washed-up"....he just changed career paths.

It's shameful that anyone would give that man tenure.

 

[Schlosser85]

If everyone was judged for the rest of their lives on what they did in the '60s and '70s, half or more of those generations would be in trouble.

 

[Thundercrack85]

If everyone was judged for the rest of their lives on what they did in the '60s and '70s, half or more of those generations would be in trouble.

My folks did some recreational drugs. They were never wanted for terrorism.

 

[Hawkingbird]

How can people justify voting for a man that decides against gay marriage?

 

[Thundercrack85]

How can people justify voting for a man that decides against gay marriage?

I dunno, worked out okay with George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, etc.

 

[redhawk23]

How can people justify voting for a man that decides against gay marriage?

The same way the justify voting for a man who orders drone strikes.


Its a major issue, for many, they consider it the most important issue, but it is not the only issue.

Its not as if Obama has taken too much of any real action in that regard anyways.

 

[redhawk23]

If everyone was judged for the rest of their lives on what they did in the '60s and '70s, half or more of those generations would be in trouble.

Sex, drugs, and rock n roll & casual racism =/= bombing public buildings. I mean really whats the statute of limitations on that?

 

[SV Fan]

Its a major issue, for many, they consider it the most important issue, but it is not the only issue.

Actually I think for a lot of people social issues like gay marriage make absolutely no difference in how they vote

 

[redhawk23]

Maybe not gay marriage but social issues are very often used as wedge issues, especially abortion.


However I'd still say that the 4% of Americans, 12 million people, who are gay, not to mention those who know and support them constitute "many" people.