Thread: American Politics during the Obama Presidency
+
Submit Report
Results 751 to 765 of 6582
-
10-03-14 11:33 #5832
Posts: 3510Worst presidents
For sheer ineffectiveness: Carter. Maybe nice guys really do finish last.
For pure evil: Nixon. When Nixon was re-elected in 1972 (also the year I fucked my first hooker), I knew I was living with some stupid people.
For sheer stupidity and cluelessness: Bush II. Not too impressed with my fellow citizens for re-electing him after there were no weapons of mass destruction.
Now as far as the best, there is not a lot to choose from but I choose Clinton because things went pretty smoothly under him. The president gets too much credit when things go well and too much blame when they go astray.
I am also a social liberal and fiscal conservative and I would also add that I favor a largely isolationist foreign policy. I really don't care how many diaper heads kill each other in the name of religion. Oh yeah, and despite being (mostly) a social liberal, anyone who's in the country illegally, kick their asses out and if they sneak back in, shoot them. Just call it an extension of my isolationist policy.
-
10-03-14 09:25 #5831
Posts: 1017Angry?
Originally Posted by Punter127 [View Original Post]
-
10-03-14 09:19 #5830
Posts: 54Originally Posted by Punter127 [View Original Post]
The Iraq war has been debated enough so I'll skip that as we won't change each other's view on that topic. I will maintain what I wrote and will say that people voted for that war based on the intentionally inaccurate information and "faulty intelligence" that was presented to them. Flip the script where a democratic president did what Bush did and the right would also claim ex post facto that their vote was based on the faulty intelligence presented to them and therefore not responsible for it.
and
Originally Posted by Punter127 [View Original Post]
As it relates to the worst presidents in our history, Bush has to be at the top of the list. On his watch, over 3000 Americans were needlessly killed as a result of the ineptitude of his administration not sharing intelligence and not following up on intelligence leads despite being warned on multiple occasions about the suspicious behaviors of the 9-11 killers. The inept manner in which they governed the Iraq war costing countless Americans lives which drew the ire of both parties. An embarrassingly incompetent Defense Secretary being forced to resign after members of his own party called for it because of his poor management of the aforementioned war. Bush's Katrina debacle and his extreme economic failings, put it all together and he is the top candidate for worst president. If a democratic president did what Bush did the right would use every bit of those instances to make the same point.
-
10-03-14 08:42 #5829
Posts: 1196Why so angry?
Originally Posted by RevBS [View Original Post]
I have an opinion, and you have yours, remember?
Are you could circle the wagons again, up to you.
Anyway I'm ROFLMAO.
-
10-03-14 07:52 #5828
Posts: 1017My ilk, your ilk, what's the difference!
As usual, steam emanating from your head and vaporizing into thin air.
-
10-03-14 07:17 #5827
Posts: 1196Originally Posted by RcCollins [View Original Post]
Originally Posted by RcCollins [View Original Post]
1. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism, especially the freedom of the individual and governmental guarantees of individual rights and liberties.
2. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.
3. favoring or permitting freedom of action, especially with respect to matters of personal belief or expression.
4. of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.
5. free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant:
Individual freedom or rights, get it?
Your claim that ISIS is a direct result of the Iraq invasion is so not persuasive. ISIS is a spin off of al-Qaeda and al-Qaeda is a global militant Islamist organization founded by Osama bin Laden, Abdullah Azzam, and several other militants, al-Qaeda formed long before the US invaded Iraq. Using your way of thinking one might say ISIS is a direct result of the killing of Osama bin Laden. Both claims are absurd if you ask me. Even if ISIS wasn't in Iraq it wouldn't prove they would not be in some other country such as syria.
If your conclusion was correct (which it's not) you act as if Bush got us in the Iraq war all by himself, do I need to remind you that Bush had bipartisan support for going into Iraq. And "Congress had many months to investigate and debate the administration's claims that Iraq was a threat as well as the likely implications of a US invasion. Members of Congress also fully recognized that the resolution authorized a full-scale invasion of a sovereign nation and a subsequent military occupation of an indefinite period. ".
Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Harry Reid, John Kerry, Dianne Feinstein, and Chuck Schumer just to name a few Democrats who voted for the Iraq Resolution authorizing military action against Iraq.
Originally Posted by RcCollins [View Original Post]
-
10-03-14 04:44 #5826
Posts: 125The state of military affairs
I have made a few comments on this site. Most of you may not recognize that I am a social liberal but a fiscal conservative. I demand that my congresional representative spend my tax revenue wisely. No one can disagree with that. Also I think we need to refresh and update our infrastructure. The benefits from working on our infastructure are gigantic. Putting people to work increases our tax revenue. Also, even though we spent. Off budget. A trillion dollars fighting a war in Iraq, we must never loose site that our military must be the best trained with the most advanced equipment available. Bad things will happen if we loose site of this. I can't remember his exact words but Eisenhower warned us that the military equipment providers were a future problem. Wow, how do we balance a need for superior military equipment with the understanding that equipment providers have always and will always try to rip us off.
Most people have a great deal of respect for former defense secretary Gates. I just wonder if Mr Gates has rested enough and ready for another challenge and become the head of a new cabinet post. Head of government military procurement. Military procurement represents a huge chunk of the military budget.
OK so again I'm just babbling. I'm sure the retired english teachers will have a field day with this and of course the scalars in our group are licking there chops. Just think about it.
-
10-02-14 23:40 #5825
Posts: 1740Originally Posted by Dccpa [View Original Post]
In other words, another strategy based on emotion.
-
10-02-14 14:40 #5824
Posts: 912Earth to Collins
Originally Posted by RcCollins [View Original Post]
We have a representative republic form of government, not a problem there as it is in my opinion the best option currently available.
The problem comes with the rise of career politicians and inherent conflicts of self interest vs public interest. Career politicians were not foreseen by the founding fathers when these documents were drafted, they foresaw people would serve their term then return to their "day jobs" after their term was over. Can you follow along so far?
The examples presented were suggestions to fix the current form of government making it more effective in its delivery of services to the electorate.
When Congress passed the 22nd Amendment to limit presidential terms in office it was not considered "odd or contradictory". Perhaps you disagree?
Regarding the reference to Obamacare, Obama's trademark legislative accomplishment, Obama's lack of foreign or domestic policy and Obama's poll numbers, as those poll numbers support the majority of the nation agrees the preceding are a disaster, if in your opinion this represents being oxymoronic and vitriolic then please feel free to stick your head back in the sand and don't look up again until after the mid-terms or possibility November 2016.
Regarding the worst presidents of my lifetime it would have to be Carter, Obama and Nixon in that order. Of course Carter is loving Obama as he will probably replace Carter at the very bottom of the list.
-
10-02-14 13:19 #5823
Posts: 192Originally Posted by Esten [View Original Post]
-
10-02-14 13:10 #5822
Posts: 192Originally Posted by HotRod11 [View Original Post]
For me, Nixon and Obama are clearly the worst two Presidents during my lifetime. I never thought anyone could challenge Nixon's record of economic incompetence, but Obama is catching up and I think he can pull it off in two more years.
Best President for me would probably be a choice between Eisenhower and Kennedy.
If anyone wants to see a competent leader, look at John Key of New Zealand. That country has gone through the GFC, two major earthquakes in its 3rd largest city and their current bickering is over how to spend the projected surplus and why their currency and housing prices are too high.
-
10-02-14 11:39 #5821
Posts: 54Originally Posted by Doppelganger [View Original Post]
-
10-02-14 11:17 #5820
Posts: 9Wtf?
LOL yall talk politics with the chicas too? Who gives a shit about iraqi islamic whatevers they got pussy all over the place here.
-
10-02-14 10:11 #5819
Posts: 912Not the system
Collins, there is nothing wrong with the system, the problem lies with career politicians both liberal and conservative and I use those labels lightly. They are more interested in reelection and feathering their own nests than the people's business. I don't remember the last time a poor boy got elected to Congress and did not leave a millionaire. Which raises the perfect argument for term limits, if it's good enough for the president then it's good enough for the House and Senate. At least in Texas we reduce our state legislature's mischief by limiting their ability to meet to 140 days every two years, maybe a good yardstick for Washington? Idle hands are the devil's play things.
The country elected a clown and now we have a circus; foreign policy, what foreign policy?; domestic policy. What domestic policy? ObamaCare, bears no resemblance in fact to what was promised and is about to collapse after the ruling there is no provision for subsidies under the federal program which I am sure is going to the Supremes making it the last nail in the coffin for that Frankenstein of a program.
Depending on the poll, Obama's numbers are in the high 30's or very low 40's, so we are talking Bush territory for the "Savior of American".
-
10-02-14 07:44 #5818
Posts: 54Originally Posted by Punter127 [View Original Post]
What are the chances you will vote for a democrat in the next election given that their policies will always be liberal and appear to be in direct contrast to your postings? Your countering of the factual conclusion with an opinion is so not persuasive. Prior to Bush no groups dared to operate from Iraq because of the tyrant that was running the country and that is not an opinion. You missed the point about war presidents as that was a response to the post below and not anything you wrote but your derisive labeling of Obama again eliminates any doubts as to where your allegiance lies.
As to where do we go from here, we need more independent lawmakers to take action for the good of the country domestically and internationally. The two party system is screwing the tax payers royally. Very little gets done while both sides continually blame each other while they get rich off the tax payers. A large threat to the tax payers is right under our noses, our own law makers. Specifically as it relates to ISIS or any other terrorist groups which affect all countries; its quite simple, ALL countries need to step up and participate in or support the war against these groups. The US cannot be the constables of the world, the US needs to sit one or two of these conflicts out and let the chips fall. A lot of these countries sit on their hands because they know that America will always give up its citizens to die for the cause.
-
The Following User Says Thank You to Rc Collins For This Post: