American Politics during the Obama Presidency

[QUOTE=Black Shirt; 420184]Interviewing Huntsman, Hannity said he could never serve as an ambassador under Obama, as he was not sure what kind of American Obama is. This is a guy who has sold his soul so that he can continue to misquote and misrepresent any issue for ratings, and he felt that Trump has alot to offer this country since he qualify under "being so successful and rich".

As for Trump, anybody that has that kind of hairpiece is a first class fraud.[/QUOTE]Trump is in truth a second-rate fraud!

[QUOTE=Moveon; 420181]Now that the 9-9-9 Cain show has trotted off into the sunset we now have the latest laughable right-wing circus act.

Donald Trump will be hosting an up and upcoming Republican debate.

I have seen it all, my friends.

A Trump debate is not only laughable but clearly is making a mockery of the Republican Party.

This truly is Presidential!

Can't wait to see this new Apprentice act.[/QUOTE]"It feels so good to be back here at the Dexter Lake Club"

Trump is no less qualified to host a debate than any of the other jaded, biased, predisposed, liberal hacks who have hosted past debates. I'm no Trump fan (he wouldn't know a conservative if it pulled the rug off the top of his head) but lets be honest, he is a tv personality just like all the talentless folks who get passed off as "news" people.

[i]"trotted off into the sunset"[/i]

[i]"laughable right-wing circus act"[/i]

[i]"mockery of the Republican Party"[/i]

Amazing. The election in almost a year away, the Republicans haven't even selected their candidate, and yet the left wing "politics of personal destruction" has already begun.

Here's a radical idea for you Obama sycophants: How about we have a discussion about how to solve the issues facing our country instead of personally attacking anyone who disagrees with you.

Answer: Because the liberals can't win on the merits of their arguments, and they all know it.

Thanks,

Jackson

[QUOTE=Jackson; 420187][i]"the left wing "politics of personal destruction" has already begun.

Obama sycophants. Personally attacking anyone who disagrees with you.

Jackson[/QUOTE]Jacko. The Republican candidates weekly TV series. Debates of the Giants. Are mostly one candidate personally attacking another. Doing liberals work and saving voters time in concluding who has answers to the economic crisis your buddies visited on the globe.

[quote]Sol Sanders | Follow the money No. 97 | A pipeline to. Well, almost. Eternity.

Camouflaged by Congressional political badminton and Pres. Barack Obama's demagoguery, the Keystone XL Pipeline Project represents solutions to economic and security issues far exceeding its general appreciation.

Half truths on all sides have obscured the project's underlying fundamentals. Some are only emerging as additional research and technology is applied – most of it, for a change, good news in that it boosts estimates of access to available North American new fossil fuels reserves even if at higher prices.

Contrary to claims of Congressional proponents, the project is not an immediate positive economic bonanza. Like all natural resource development projects, construction employment will be temporary and jobs minimal when the pipeline is actually functional. Of course, given the current environment, any new jobs of any duration not added to the public payroll. The project is funded privately at something over $7 billion. Is a godsend.

Its importance lies in its contribution to what should be a longer term USA energy strategy, a consideration often missing in heated partisan debate.

First of all, direct access to the Canadian tar sands affords fallback access for the almost bottomless USA energy maw – developing rapidly long- term whatever the short-term diminished demand of a temporarily crippled economy. Scandal after scandal is proving the Obama Administration's so-called green energy strategy corrupt as well as wasteful and ineffectual. Keystone, on the other hand, would put crude into the Texas petrochemical refinery complex already absorbing Venezuela's similar heavier oil – those reserves recently reestimated upward with spectacular finds on the Orinoco River.

That would give the USA not only an emergency alternative to the Venezuelan crude, fourth largest of our import sources, but leverage against the machinations of gringo-baiting Venezuelan Pres. Hugo Chavez. Given that country's long troubled history, necessary insurance is needed even in a post-Chavez Venezuela [soon perhaps with reports the fiery demagogue may soon fall victim to cancer largely untreated so he could continue exercising his one-man rule].

The expanded pipeline proposal also now would pick up on its way the more attractive sweet crude from the Bakken strike in North Dakota, already one of the largest in USA history and apparently linked by new successful prospecting and new shale recovery technologies to huge neighboring regional deposits. With Bakken already having added an estimated 10% to American reserves, these could turn into the largest petroleum find in USA history.

As the pipeline travels south, it also aims at untangling a crude gathering traffic jam in Oklahoma and expanding the tanker delivery scene on the Texas coast.

But radical environmentalists had chosen – with the help of the usual Hollywood suspects assuaging their guilt for their gratuitously huge earnings – to make Keystone a major test. That was despite three years research by experts for the State Dept. Had not turned up sufficient environmental issues to block the project. When local interests in Nebraska– ignoring the relatively clean record of the country's vast pipeline networks – argued spills might threaten a critical local aquifer, the Canadian company countered with a $100-million-dollar detour around it.

Washington rumors are Sec. Of State Hillary Clinton was not only not consulted but not forewarned when Pres. Obama, anticipating the 2011 election, threw a bouquet to enviromentalistas who had been increasingly jaundiced at his 2008 promises. But with even normally loyal trade unionists joining the outcry against the White House postponement to go ahead until after next year's election, it was inevitable the issue would become a cudgel for the Republicans.

Canadian threats to transfer their affections to the Chinese market might have some validity – although even Chavez is arranging swaps with Iran for his Chinese sales with Venezuelan crude supposedly sold to Beijing flowing into Texas. But level-headed Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper – an economist and native of Canada's provincial giant oilwell, Alberta– may have overestimated American common sense. [Recent hints suggest Ottawa feels it is dealing with an overburdened, troubled USA and has to demonstrate inordinate patience for both their sakes. One has to wonder what the two chief executives talk about in frequent and what appear to be pleasant meetings! ] But, in fact, Canada's role as No. 1 foreign energy supplier to the USA– something forgotten in much of the talk about 'American energy independence' – probably, rightfully, isn't going away in the near future. The Republicans may be seeing to that.[/QUOTE]For Obama to block or even delay the Keystone pipeline is just utter madness!

Obama considers the private sector to be a nuisance. In Obama's perfect world, everyone would be community organizers. For Obama the private sector is only a source to extort money in order to reward birdbrain solar energy advocates, welfare recipients and various supporters who have no idea what a real job is.

Obama, when it comes to the economy, is more clueless than Jimmy Carter. Fortuneately for us Jimmy Carter was replaced by someone who understand the power of the private sector. We might not be so lucky this time.

Well, as American troops come home, leaving Iraq to chaos and civil war, you would think that it is time to rethink foreign policy. But at the last Iowa Republican presidential debate, most candidates were ready to bomb Iran when ask what they will do if Iran started to blockade the Straits of Hormutz. Only Paul and Houseman seem to think that there could be other options. I guess we can't have the world's greatest fighting force just relaxing for a while. And then we are told that we will be committing sucide if there are any cuts in the defense budget. The War Machine is still alive and humming.

After watching the folks in Washington, both Democrat (spend, spend, spend) and Republican (apparently leaderless) , for the last few years it makes you wonder if the ending of Tom Clancy's book 'Debt of Honor' would not be the best of all possible outcomes!

[QUOTE=Black Shirt;420324]Well, as American troops come home, leaving Iraq to chaos and civil war, you would think that it is time to rethink foreign policy. But at the last Iowa Republican presidential debate, most candidates were ready to bomb Iran when ask what they will do if Iran started to blockade the Straits of Hormutz. Only Paul and Houseman seem to think that there could be other options. I guess we can't have the world's greatest fighting force just relaxing for a while. And then we are told that we will be committing sucide if there are any cuts in the defense budget. The War Machine is still alive and humming.[/QUOTE]So what do you and Canitasguy think should be our response to a 'blockade the Straits of Hormutz'?

[QUOTE=Punter 127;420328]So what do you and Canitasguy think should be our response to a 'blockade the Straits of Hormutz'?[/QUOTE]What with Christmas shopping, wrapping gifts, drinking punch and kissing my chicas under the mistletoe, I guess I missed the news on the blockade! Looking at the news I see the media missed it too! Punter. Maybe you better head over there and check your sources. And why aren't you more worried about a blockade of the Panama Canal by Danny and Hugo (a global security expert like you should easily figure out who they are?)

[QUOTE=Punter 127;420328]So what do you and Canitasguy think should be our response to a 'blockade the Straits of Hormutz'?[/QUOTE]Bring all of the NATO warships to the strait and park them there. Talk to all nations about splitting up the assets of Iran. Bring in the towing ships to dig out the sunken wrecks. Be ready to invade

[QUOTE=Punter 127;420328]So what do you and Canitasguy think should be our response to a 'blockade the Straits of Hormutz'?[/QUOTE]There are numerous stategies, but being macho is not one of them. Does China feel it need to bomb Iran.

So, is it because we are "leader of the free world" (Military / Industrial Complex) or is it because of our mega-consumption of energy (Big Buisness) that drives our foreign policy? We are told that the world's resources of oil is infinite. So we continue to ridicule alternative energy and ignore alternative lifestyles. Our problems are mostly self-inflicted, e. g. Congress.

"Excess" describes our lifestyle, yet, most would not even know what that means. Is that why Americans laugh at the guys who wear speedos? A couple of my friends came to visit me in Bangkok, they work very hard and makes over 6 figures yearly. They threw money around, plenty from where that came from. They are within 6/7 years of 65, yet, none of them are financially ready to retire and will continue to work past 65. That's America for you.

Anyway, I want to take this opportunity to wish everyone Happy Holidays (politically correct).

[QUOTE=Black Shirt;420331]There are numerous stategies, but being macho is not one of them. Does China feel it need to bomb Iran.[/quote]Are you joking? How many days would China accept her economy being paralyzed before they would take action? Do you think Iran will stop oil going to China?

Would you mind sharing with us some of these 'numerous strategies' you speak of?

Would 'numerous strategies' be akin to the strategy used in Libya, or the one used to destroy our relationship with Pakistan or perhaps our current Iraq strategy? How about the strategy of thumbing our nose at our Canadian friends over the Keystone pipeline?

[quote]So, is it because we are "leader of the free world" (Military / Industrial Complex) or is it because of our mega-consumption of energy (Big Buisness) that drives our foreign policy? We are told that the world's resources of oil is infinite. So we continue to ridicule alternative energy and ignore alternative lifestyles. Our problems are mostly self-inflicted, e. g. Congress.[/quote]Funny thing, seems like everything was the Presidents fault when Bush was in office, now it's Congress? Who's fault was it when the Democrats controlled Congress and the White House?

How much of a role did Congress play in Libya?

When alternative energies become economically feasible and safe the world will embrace them.

Should we build more nukes?

What 'alternative lifestyles' are you talking about, do you want us to go back to riding horses, or living in the woods and eating nuts and berries?

[quote]"Excess" describes our lifestyle, yet, most would not even know what that means. Is that why Americans laugh at the guys who wear speedos? A couple of my friends came to visit me in Bangkok, they work very hard and makes over 6 figures yearly. They threw money around, plenty from where that came from. They are within 6/7 years of 65, yet, none of them are financially ready to retire and will continue to work past 65. That's America for you.[/quote]I don't really see what wearing Speedos has to do with the Straits Hormuz, but I'm guilty of laughing when I see fat old men in Speedos, but I also laugh when I see ladyboys strutting down Beach road in Pattaya. (can you connect the dots?)

However I do not laugh at the fat old Russian ladies on Pattaya beach in bikinis, they make me puke.

In one paragraph you have judged people that think guys in Speedos are funny, you have judged your friends for the way they spend the money [u][b]they earned[/u][/b], and their lifestyle, and you have stereotyped your friends and the American people. [b]WOW[/b] That's some paragraph.

FYI my first job was at the age of 12 and I retired at the age of 57, I live in a condo in Cebu Philippines and I maintain an apartment in Pattaya Thailand. I would be living in BA but it just became to expensive. Twice a year I visit the USA with side trips to South America and/or Europe, and plan to visit more Asian countries in the future.

How do I fit your American stereotype?

Now let me see if I can clarify my original question to you. What do you think [strike] America[/strike] the 'World' should do if the Straits Hormuz are blocked tomorrow? I'm primarily interested in what you think we should do if it happens tomorrow, not what we should have done in the past or what our long term strategies should be.

I suspect you will continue to avoid the question.

You do understand that we're talking about World economies being paralyzed, right?

Iran's threat in the Straits Hormuz is a prime example of why we need the Keystone pipeline, and why we need to utilize our own resources. Then and only then should we look at fantasy world make you feel good alternatives.

[quote]Anyway, I want to take this opportunity to wish everyone Happy Holidays (politically correct).[/QUOTE]Thanks, I'll take this opportunity as well to wish everyone a Merry Christmas, and a happy New Year. I hope I haven't offended anyone but for me Christmas will always be Christmas, and I refuse to kowtow to political correctness.

If the Straits of Hormutz was blockaded by President Ahmadinejad tomorrow, I would invite him to meet me in Yalta in order to apologize for our past misdeeds, in particular, our overthrowing the ruling government in 1953 and installing the Shah as our puppet. I would personally kill him using a special CIA-designed tie. Right in front of a shocked Putin, to whom I say,"behave, or you could be next'.

The I will go to the American public to announce that we are now on a war footing and that there will now be a military draft, that petrol will be rationed, kids will go to school 6 days a week, and food consumption will be based on colories required by job classification. I am sure Americans are willing to walk rather than drive to the 7-11 and eat a regular hamburger rather the quarter-pounder or double / double. We will have a leaner and meaner American tomorrow instead of the bloated and bankrupt America today.

I will be reelected in 2012.

The more pertinent question is what would lead Iran to block the Straits of Hormutz. It would do so only in retaiiation for sanctions it deem to punish and isolate Iran. History is repeating itself here. Sanctions did not seem to work against Iraq, Cuba, Myanmar except to make it's people suffer. And going back futher, Japan and Pearl Harbor. Sanctions denying oil to Japan because of their expansionist policies by the same western colonial club who had already divy up the world between themselves. Basically saying,"you can't join the club because you are too late".

Israel & Palestine, that is the thorn in our relationship with the Middle East. But oil, black gold remains the love of our lives. We will surely kill for it.

Our perspective and loyalty really depends on which side of the fence we are on, and how it will affect our lives and pocketbooks. Yes, we are human after all.