|
On August 21 2011 06:10 thedirtyleg wrote:
Just saw this on Jon Huntsman's Twitter:
"To be clear. I believe in evolution and trust scientists on global warming. Call me crazy."
Awesome. The most sane statement I've heard from an American politician in the last decade.
Too bad that kind of statement will get him killed by the evangelicals.  He's a genuinely good candidate that has instituted seemingly successful reforms when he was governor. Utah loves this guy.
|
On August 21 2011 06:00 Zergneedsfood wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2011 03:47 jdseemoreglass wrote:On August 21 2011 03:43 nicebuffalo wrote:
if bachman gets in the office we are all doomed. And if Obama gets reelected we are all doomed. Come to think of it, we are all doomed no matter what!  I seriously don't know why people hate Obama so much. There's almost no reason to hate the guy and think that he'll doom us all. >.>
Except for the fact that his administration has:
extended corporate tax cuts which do not create more jobs
extended tax cuts for the super-wealthy which contribute mightily to the deficit all these people seem to care about
failed to put forth any sort of jobs plan or concentrated jobs agenda
not attempted to prosecute any major financial institutions
failed to close Guantanamo
not attempted to prosecute any authors of the torture memos
expanded government prosecution of whistleblowers
expanded the CIA's rendition and torture programs
expanded domestic spying programs
sought authority to access records of any individual's internet use for any reason
dramatically escalated the war in Afghanistan
failed to end the Iraq War
mired us in another pointless foreign intervention with no foreseeable end (Libya)
systematically purged itself of any progressive or liberal voices in favor of establishment figures
I mean with a record like his it's a wonder the guy has any fans left.
|
On August 21 2011 06:28 Fleebenworth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2011 06:00 Zergneedsfood wrote:On August 21 2011 03:47 jdseemoreglass wrote:On August 21 2011 03:43 nicebuffalo wrote:
if bachman gets in the office we are all doomed. And if Obama gets reelected we are all doomed. Come to think of it, we are all doomed no matter what! I seriously don't know why people hate Obama so much. There's almost no reason to hate the guy and think that he'll doom us all. >.> Except for the fact that his administration has: extended corporate tax cuts which do not create more jobs extended tax cuts for the super-wealthy which contribute mightily to the deficit all these people seem to care about failed to put forth any sort of jobs plan or concentrated jobs agenda not attempted to prosecute any major financial institutions failed to close Guantanamo not attempted to prosecute any authors of the torture memos expanded government prosecution of whistleblowers expanded the CIA's rendition and torture programs expanded domestic spying programs sought authority to access records of any individual's internet use for any reason dramatically escalated the war in Afghanistan failed to end the Iraq War mired us in another pointless foreign intervention with no foreseeable end (Libya) systematically purged itself of any progressive or liberal voices in favor of establishment figures I mean with a record like his it's a wonder the guy has any fans left.
So he's a pragmatist and a centrist that has had to make concessions on tax cuts but has continued to maintain tax cuts for the middle class
So he's proposed an infrastructure bank that would create jobs but people like you obviously haven't really followed with it.
So he's passed an overhaul of financial regulation that, while may have problems, recognizes that scrutinizing banks too much only hurts their competitiveness against British, Swedish, and Chinese banks.
So he's figured out that while in office, there are issues of national security that probably requires places like Guantanamo and certain spy programs and such to stay open.
So he's found that sometimes it can be dangerous to just release state secrets.
So he's almost ended the war in Iraq and left only non-combat troops.
So he's totally for human rights and has called for certain dictators to step down, something that's been hard for previous administrations to do.
So he's escalated a war in the country that's been completely ignored by the other Administration since 2003.
Really? Does anyone want to come up with a logical and well founded reason that gives us a GREAT reason why we shouldn't like someone who's been trying his best to get the country on the right track?
Somebody PLEASE tell me. I'm DYING to hear them. >.>
|
On August 21 2011 06:34 Zergneedsfood wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2011 06:28 Fleebenworth wrote:On August 21 2011 06:00 Zergneedsfood wrote:On August 21 2011 03:47 jdseemoreglass wrote:On August 21 2011 03:43 nicebuffalo wrote:
if bachman gets in the office we are all doomed. And if Obama gets reelected we are all doomed. Come to think of it, we are all doomed no matter what! I seriously don't know why people hate Obama so much. There's almost no reason to hate the guy and think that he'll doom us all. >.> Except for the fact that his administration has: extended corporate tax cuts which do not create more jobs extended tax cuts for the super-wealthy which contribute mightily to the deficit all these people seem to care about failed to put forth any sort of jobs plan or concentrated jobs agenda not attempted to prosecute any major financial institutions failed to close Guantanamo not attempted to prosecute any authors of the torture memos expanded government prosecution of whistleblowers expanded the CIA's rendition and torture programs expanded domestic spying programs sought authority to access records of any individual's internet use for any reason dramatically escalated the war in Afghanistan failed to end the Iraq War mired us in another pointless foreign intervention with no foreseeable end (Libya) systematically purged itself of any progressive or liberal voices in favor of establishment figures I mean with a record like his it's a wonder the guy has any fans left. So he's third term Bush
Shorter version of your post. You are a partisan hack.
User was warned for this post
|
People make waaaayyyy too much out of the religion thing. Think about it, Bush was about as religious as they come and he was in office for eight years. Did he impose a theocracy? Hell no. The only thing that he did was limit federal funding to certain programs that raised ethical concerns for him, like stem cell research and some of the global contraception aid initiatives. Hardly any Americans was even affected by these actions.
Edit: For the record, the stem cell research funding wasn't even totally cut off. It was just limited to using 60 available lines of stem cells.
|
On August 21 2011 06:41 xDaunt wrote:
People make waaaayyyy too much out of the religion thing. Think about it, Bush was about as religious as they come and he was in office for eight years. Did he impose a theocracy? Hell no. The only thing that he did was limit federal funding to certain programs that raised ethical concerns for him, like stem cell research and some of the global contraception aid initiatives. Hardly any Americans was even affected by these actions.
Stem cell research and sex education affect everyone.
|
On August 21 2011 06:43 Fleebenworth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2011 06:41 xDaunt wrote:
People make waaaayyyy too much out of the religion thing. Think about it, Bush was about as religious as they come and he was in office for eight years. Did he impose a theocracy? Hell no. The only thing that he did was limit federal funding to certain programs that raised ethical concerns for him, like stem cell research and some of the global contraception aid initiatives. Hardly any Americans was even affected by these actions. Stem cell research and sex education effect everyone.
Potentially, but they're ultimately just more "spending programs" that are luxuries. Private entities are free to do whatever stem cell research they want. And we really don't need to be dropping millions of dollars of condoms off in Africa where the people won't even use them anyway.
|
On August 21 2011 06:41 Fleebenworth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2011 06:34 Zergneedsfood wrote:On August 21 2011 06:28 Fleebenworth wrote:On August 21 2011 06:00 Zergneedsfood wrote:On August 21 2011 03:47 jdseemoreglass wrote:On August 21 2011 03:43 nicebuffalo wrote:
if bachman gets in the office we are all doomed. And if Obama gets reelected we are all doomed. Come to think of it, we are all doomed no matter what! I seriously don't know why people hate Obama so much. There's almost no reason to hate the guy and think that he'll doom us all. >.> Except for the fact that his administration has: extended corporate tax cuts which do not create more jobs extended tax cuts for the super-wealthy which contribute mightily to the deficit all these people seem to care about failed to put forth any sort of jobs plan or concentrated jobs agenda not attempted to prosecute any major financial institutions failed to close Guantanamo not attempted to prosecute any authors of the torture memos expanded government prosecution of whistleblowers expanded the CIA's rendition and torture programs expanded domestic spying programs sought authority to access records of any individual's internet use for any reason dramatically escalated the war in Afghanistan failed to end the Iraq War mired us in another pointless foreign intervention with no foreseeable end (Libya) systematically purged itself of any progressive or liberal voices in favor of establishment figures I mean with a record like his it's a wonder the guy has any fans left. So he's third term Bush Shorter version of your post. You are a partisan hack.
How am I partisan hack? All of those ideas were centrist, well founded, and pragmatic reasons why president Obama did all of those things.
You clearly didn't even remotely read my post, and obviously don't look deep enough into issues to properly analyze whether or not the president is doing a good job.
This administration is a lot more centrist and willing to compromise, something many people in this country are very in favor of.
Edit: Also, I gave you the courtesy and read through your entire post. As misguided as it was, I gave you a perfectly legitimate answer that you refuse to acknowledge.
|
On August 21 2011 06:28 Fleebenworth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2011 06:00 Zergneedsfood wrote:On August 21 2011 03:47 jdseemoreglass wrote:On August 21 2011 03:43 nicebuffalo wrote:
if bachman gets in the office we are all doomed. And if Obama gets reelected we are all doomed. Come to think of it, we are all doomed no matter what! I seriously don't know why people hate Obama so much. There's almost no reason to hate the guy and think that he'll doom us all. >.> Except for the fact that his administration has: extended corporate tax cuts which do not create more jobs extended tax cuts for the super-wealthy which contribute mightily to the deficit all these people seem to care about failed to put forth any sort of jobs plan or concentrated jobs agenda not attempted to prosecute any major financial institutions failed to close Guantanamo not attempted to prosecute any authors of the torture memos expanded government prosecution of whistleblowers expanded the CIA's rendition and torture programs expanded domestic spying programs sought authority to access records of any individual's internet use for any reason dramatically escalated the war in Afghanistan failed to end the Iraq War mired us in another pointless foreign intervention with no foreseeable end (Libya) systematically purged itself of any progressive or liberal voices in favor of establishment figures I mean with a record like his it's a wonder the guy has any fans left.
I am no expert on american politics, but hasn't those exact points been the general republican concensus? In that case I am not sure you can expect any significant changes in those areas.
Since we are bound by American economy in Europe, we are hoping for no default and given the way the TEA-party has proposed it on a serious note... Bachman seems like a ticking bomb on the global economy. I don't know how the rest of the republican candidates would act internationally, but Bush sure set the bar low.
|
I think Obama's main problem has been that he WAY underestimated the resistance that the established order was going to put up. I guess he thought that with his win it was a message that people were truely to that fed up stage where they actually give a shit. Too bad our country as a whole really do not care and/or just listen to mainstream rhetoric and do not make any really informed decisions. Our country is lazy when it comes to politics, so few actually vote and many of those that do just let whatever biased media they like to tell them "how it is" and just leads them to not see the other side or flaws in their own belief systems. Fox News is popular because all they do is reinforce what those people already think/were taught when they were younger. If anyone actually did research they could rip apart all the crap that comes from both parties and really make a decision that they think would be best. No one wants to do that though.
This being said imo this election is Obama's to lose because the republicans seem too fractured to put forth a candidate that will win in the general election.
|
On August 21 2011 06:44 xDaunt wrote:And we really don't need to be dropping millions of dollars of condoms off in Africa where the people won't even use them anyway.
Apparently what was needed was dropping millions of dollars on abstinence only sex education in the good old US of A. Thanks Bush, great idea.
|
On August 21 2011 06:53 radiatoren wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2011 06:28 Fleebenworth wrote:On August 21 2011 06:00 Zergneedsfood wrote:On August 21 2011 03:47 jdseemoreglass wrote:On August 21 2011 03:43 nicebuffalo wrote:
if bachman gets in the office we are all doomed. And if Obama gets reelected we are all doomed. Come to think of it, we are all doomed no matter what! I seriously don't know why people hate Obama so much. There's almost no reason to hate the guy and think that he'll doom us all. >.> Except for the fact that his administration has: extended corporate tax cuts which do not create more jobs extended tax cuts for the super-wealthy which contribute mightily to the deficit all these people seem to care about failed to put forth any sort of jobs plan or concentrated jobs agenda not attempted to prosecute any major financial institutions failed to close Guantanamo not attempted to prosecute any authors of the torture memos expanded government prosecution of whistleblowers expanded the CIA's rendition and torture programs expanded domestic spying programs sought authority to access records of any individual's internet use for any reason dramatically escalated the war in Afghanistan failed to end the Iraq War mired us in another pointless foreign intervention with no foreseeable end (Libya) systematically purged itself of any progressive or liberal voices in favor of establishment figures I mean with a record like his it's a wonder the guy has any fans left. I am no expert on american politics, but hasn't those exact points been the general republican concensus? In that case I am not sure you can expect any significant changes in those areas. Since we are bound by American economy in Europe, we are hoping for no default and given the way the TEA-party has proposed it on a serious note... Bachman seems like a ticking bomb on the global economy. I don't know how the rest of the republican candidates would act internationally, but Bush sure set the bar low.
Actually no. Those are all liberal talking points. After the debt deal, liberals basically jumped on the president and called him way too conciliatory. I happen to disagree.
Conservatives are generally for a longer stay in the Iraq war and Afghan to continue nation building. They would like more corporate tax cuts and tax cuts for the wealthy.
I think the only one remotely being said by Republicans is the one about the conflict in Libya.
Also, the guy you quoted doesn't seem to follow any news does he?
The conflict in Libya does have a foreseeable end. The rebels are basically on Tripoli's doorstep. MOST, if not ALL foreign policy experts say that this conflict will end soon. The only issue is what happens afterwards.
Just shows how much legitimacy I give to someone who probably doesn't deserve it. *sigh*
|
if i had to pick ... ron paul
|
'Render unto Caesar' and all that. The Republicans seem to have this wonderful ideal of a right-wing Christian state, which is ironically exactly the opposite of what the Founding Fathers had in mind - something to remember for those who like to trumpet those men as the paragons of political thought and theory. Thing is, I consider myself a Christian and I find it deplorable that they are trying to basically force the many millions of people who believe differently to them to live in a Christian manner. 'I believe this, and since I think it's right I think everyone should at least be forced to act in this way too'. I would hate it if I was forced to live Sharia, or consistent with Hindu principles simply because some politicians believed in those religions.
The most wonderful aspect of America is this notion of freedom. That's the freedom to live your life within legal limits in whatever damn way you please. Let's take abortion as an example, as Republicans and Christians are wont to do. I am completely against abortion. I think it can tear apart families and, frankly, is used as another method of birth control by too many people. I also believe that a modern society needs it and people have the right to choose as they see fit. If it is illegal, abortions are performed illegally, without sterile equipment by poorly trained people. It causes complications. And what sort of a life can a child have if the parent is forced against their will to keep and raise a child?
I believe a modern society should give the freedom to choose. That's the freedom to choose whatever life you want. If you want to be religious, great. Society needs religion, imo. If you don't, that is also your choice, and it is the responsibility of the government to defend that freedom, not to impose a religion on its citizens. Christians might remember that God gave the choice to us all to live with or without Him. Our society should reflect that fact, or it kinda takes away from the notion of free will - we have to choose God's grace, not be forced into it, surely?
|
Bachman... really... good god
|
From a European viewpoint some of these candidates seem insane. I've lived in America for a few years and i absolutely love america, but i cannot understand how people that dont believe in 2nd grade science even have a chance or get media time.
I guess some of them seem alright, but every candidate has some insane view on something, or at least what most sane people would view as insane. Creationism, abortion, gay rights, taxes, and so on. The views on these things are so extreme to non-american people i think.
I am a pretty conservative person by European standards, but i'm a communist by American ones. I understand that most American people are totally sane and get that stuff like creationism is bullshit, but it's astonishing that a great part of the worlds greatest country honestly believe this shit. I remember in the 90s it wasnt as bad as this. Somewhere along the line, people, and many republicans have gone crazy.
It's too bad that many republican candidates are being pressured into this stuff. They simply cant disagree too much with the tea party or they'll lose a big chunk of their voters, so they all get more and more conservative. This whole tea-party thing has to end and the republican party needs to get "normal" again so people can take it seriously.
Ron Paul seems like the least insane of the candidates though, but still some of his views would be viewed quite extreme in the rest of the world.
|
On August 21 2011 06:41 xDaunt wrote:
People make waaaayyyy too much out of the religion thing. Think about it, Bush was about as religious as they come and he was in office for eight years. Did he impose a theocracy? Hell no. The only thing that he did was limit federal funding to certain programs that raised ethical concerns for him, like stem cell research and some of the global contraception aid initiatives. Hardly any Americans was even affected by these actions.
Edit: For the record, the stem cell research funding wasn't even totally cut off. It was just limited to using 60 available lines of stem cells.
From a European perspective he laid the foundation for the theocracy...
|
On August 21 2011 06:44 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2011 06:43 Fleebenworth wrote:On August 21 2011 06:41 xDaunt wrote:
People make waaaayyyy too much out of the religion thing. Think about it, Bush was about as religious as they come and he was in office for eight years. Did he impose a theocracy? Hell no. The only thing that he did was limit federal funding to certain programs that raised ethical concerns for him, like stem cell research and some of the global contraception aid initiatives. Hardly any Americans was even affected by these actions. Stem cell research and sex education effect everyone. Potentially, but they're ultimately just more "spending programs" that are luxuries. Private entities are free to do whatever stem cell research they want. And we really don't need to be dropping millions of dollars of condoms off in Africa where the people won't even use them anyway.
No, actually. Private firms have not nor will they fund major research that has a 20+ year window before it can actually become profitable, it's just not going to happen. Government has always funded basic research like this and that is a large reason why we have enjoyed such dominance in science and industry, etc. I'm not even going to address the borderline racist bit about condoms in Africa.
@zergneedsfood
Just because you keep promoting this myth that I don't follow the news closely doesn't make it so. Your gullibility with regards to Libya is disgusting, particularly given how Afghanistan and Iraq have turned out. Obama has continued every single Bush policy that made his administration so detestable; the only difference is that he's doing it in the guise of a progressive reformer. Turns out people are just stupid enough not to notice!
|
On August 21 2011 07:27 BlackFlag wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2011 06:41 xDaunt wrote:
People make waaaayyyy too much out of the religion thing. Think about it, Bush was about as religious as they come and he was in office for eight years. Did he impose a theocracy? Hell no. The only thing that he did was limit federal funding to certain programs that raised ethical concerns for him, like stem cell research and some of the global contraception aid initiatives. Hardly any Americans was even affected by these actions.
Edit: For the record, the stem cell research funding wasn't even totally cut off. It was just limited to using 60 available lines of stem cells. From a European perspective he laid the foundation for the theocracy...
The foundations were laid down in the soil of America like a century ago.
|
On August 21 2011 07:33 Fleebenworth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2011 06:44 xDaunt wrote:On August 21 2011 06:43 Fleebenworth wrote:On August 21 2011 06:41 xDaunt wrote:
People make waaaayyyy too much out of the religion thing. Think about it, Bush was about as religious as they come and he was in office for eight years. Did he impose a theocracy? Hell no. The only thing that he did was limit federal funding to certain programs that raised ethical concerns for him, like stem cell research and some of the global contraception aid initiatives. Hardly any Americans was even affected by these actions. Stem cell research and sex education effect everyone. Potentially, but they're ultimately just more "spending programs" that are luxuries. Private entities are free to do whatever stem cell research they want. And we really don't need to be dropping millions of dollars of condoms off in Africa where the people won't even use them anyway. No, actually. Private firms have not nor will they fund major research that has a 20+ year window before it can actually become profitable, it's just not going to happen. Government has always funded basic research like this and that is a large reason why we have enjoyed such dominance in science and industry, etc. I'm not even going to address the borderline racist bit about condoms in Africa. @zergneedsfood Just because you keep promoting this myth that I don't follow the news closely doesn't make it so. Your gullibility with regards to Libya is disgusting, particularly given how Afghanistan and Iraq have turned out. Obama has continued every single Bush policy that made his administration so detestable; the only difference is that he's doing it in the guise of a progressive reformer. Turns out people are just stupid enough not to notice!
Okay, even if it was a myth, you're not doing a very good job of dispelling it.
If you had just checked the Libya thread you'd see that the rebels have made significant progress. Like I said, the question is not will Qaddafi go but what happens when he goes. And when he does, rest assured America does not have any long standing presence in the country anyway.
You also don't even back up your evidence about Afghanistan and Iraq. Afghanistan is a necessary conflict since we've been there and allowed the situation to have gotten worse. Obama is doing the opposite of Bush by placing Counterinsurgency rather than Nationbuilding at the head of his foreign policy strategy in the war on terror. He has pulled significantly from Iraq and left that nation mostly in the hands of a semi-functioning Iraqi parliament.
Once again, you clearly don't understand what you're talking about. You blast rhetoric in my direction as if it's me that's not doing enough to understand issues, when I have given you many good reasons why you're wrong about president Obama not trying out practical and progressive agendas.
If you elaborated on any of your claims, that would be nice. But since you can't even come up with a single refutation to my legitimate reasons as to why Obama has played a compromiser and a centrist, that shows how misinformed you are.
Any person that knows what he was talking about could have come up with counter arguments that would've led to an intelligent discussion. Unfortunately, I'm stuck using actual evidence against someone with no substantive sources.
Also, he is not Bush. His foreign and domestic policies vary widely from the Bush Administration. The only similarities are the policy priorities that he needed to extend and continue for national security reasons. All you do is pick on the president for situations out of his control.
Either you don't take your time to, or you're simply too misinformed to respond. And since you casually took your time to respond to me again with a vague claim filled post, I'm just going to assume that you're ignorant.
Edit: I'm going to make myself clear: I do disapprove of the president. I am unhappy on his stances towards things like Gitmo and our current foreign policy and economy policy.
But that doesn't mean that I don't understand where the president is coming from.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
