are the liberals sad about Obama?

@edgarblythe,

edgarblythe wrote:

He was very friendly with a Republican or two before he ran.
It's one reason I held fast to my support for Hillary for so long.

Well, for that matter,
William F. Buckley and Allard Lowenstein were friends.
He even spoke at Lowenstein 's funeral.

Did that impair Buckley 's conservatism?

1 Reply

@dyslexia,

dyslexia wrote:

i'm not edgar, but, yes Hillary would have won.

Maybe; McCain was a lousy candidate.

I wish we had nominated and fielded Ron Paul.
David

0 Replies

Ron Paul. Haw haw haw haw haw haw. No reply necessary.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

edgarblythe wrote:

He was very friendly with a Republican or two before he ran.
It's one reason I held fast to my support for Hillary for so long.

Well, for that matter,
William F. Buckley and Allard Lowenstein were friends.
He even spoke at Lowenstein 's funeral.

Did that impair Buckley 's conservatism?

How many public offices did Buckley run for?

0 Replies

@edgarblythe,

I wish they had too. I would have voted for RP over BO any day of the week.

That's change we can believe in.

2 Replies

@maporsche,

It would have been the final insult, after the past 8 years.

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

At least he'd actually do something about making our government smaller/more efficient. He was a large proponent of reducing our deficit spending as well...and in the real way, not in the Obama way where he just talks about how nice it would be, but then proceeds to quadruple the deficit in his first 6 months.

1 Reply

@maporsche,

maporsche wrote:

At least he'd actually do something about making our government smaller/more efficient. He was a large proponent of reducing our deficit spending as well...and in the real way, not in the Obama way where he just talks about how nice it would be, but then proceeds to quadruple the deficit in his first 6 months.

I understand your sentiment, but please - Obama did not quadruple the deficit. I'm not even sure he doubled it.

Cycloptichorn

3 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Quote:

I understand your sentiment, but please - Obama did not quadruple the deficit. I'm not even sure he doubled it.

I see that you are high today.....Obama has been in office only a few months, get a number for the bush deficit increase per day in office and the obama per day number, then lets talk.

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

And of course, once again, i will tediously point out that money bills originate in the House. In terms of spending, the President may try to offer leadership, but the Congress giveth, and the Congress taketh away, while the President can only sign or veto.

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Maybe my hyperbole wasn't obvious enough.

I'll edit, "...but then proceeds to increase the deficit 1,000 times over, all within the first six months."

0 Replies

@Setanta,

So, Obama hasn't found that veto pen in the Oval Office yet, is that what you're saying.

Obama signs these bills into law. Obama owns the responsibility. You know, the buck stops here, and all that (refering back to his campaign rhetoric).

1 Reply

I can understand how you might be disappointed in the political moves he's made so far from an ideological aspect, but I don't understand how anyone can be dissatisfied because he hasn't done enough for a specific group or issue yet. He's working his goddammed balls off on many different things. To say that he hasn't done enough for any one group or on any one issue so far seems a bit pushy and selfish. He'll get to the gays eventually; in case nobody has noticed, the guy's been kind of busy with more important issues, like saving the country from financial collapse, restoring our image in the world, and dealing with annoying Republican pests, such as the one in the clip below.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
I understand your sentiment, but please - Obama did not quadruple the deficit. I'm not even sure he doubled it.

I see that you are high today.....Obama has been in office only a few months, get a number for the bush deficit increase per day in office and the obama per day number, then lets talk.

Bush's numbers are amortized over the 8 years he's been in office; Obama was slammed with a huge amount of expenses and a giant mess left for him by the last administration right off the bat. It's an invalid comparison.

My original point stands unchallenged.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@maporsche,

No, that's not what i'm saying, and if you were honest, you'd acknowledge it. He has the situation left to him, and he has the Congress with which to attempt to solve the problems inherent in the situation. But he can't stop pork, he can't force numbers on the Congress, and at the end of the day, the best he can do is to sign on to what Congress sends over, unless he thinks he can get something better.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Quote:

Bush's numbers are amortized over the 8 years he's been in office; Obama was slammed with a huge amount of expenses and a giant mess left for him by the last administration right off the bat. It's an invalid comparison.

You assume that it is a given that the spending Obama has done was necessary, while it is the majority opinion it is not a fact. It is very unproven that Obama has spent well also. On both the count of the amount and how it wasspent Obama's spending was not preordained. He is responsible for what he has spent and how it has been spent, the numbers stand. You can't take a eraser to the figures like you want to do.

1 Reply

There are few people who are in more of a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation than a President, any President, attempting to deal with congressional spending. Clinton let the government go broke, twice, fighting a Republican Congress over irresponsible spending. For as much as i consider Bush's administration to have been a disaster, it was Republican Congress which for six years spent us into a multi-trillion dollar deficit. In view of the deficit left behind, it is little short of pure idiocy to suggest that Mr. Obama is personally responsible for even having doubled that deficit.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Quote:

In view of the deficit left behind, it is little short of pure idiocy to suggest that Mr. Obama is personally responsible for even having doubled that deficit.

Bullshit, team obama is running the recovery effort, not Congress. Obama is in charge of his team, Obama is responsible.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
Bush's numbers are amortized over the 8 years he's been in office; Obama was slammed with a huge amount of expenses and a giant mess left for him by the last administration right off the bat. It's an invalid comparison.

You assume that it is a given that the spending Obama has done was necessary, while it is the majority opinion it is not a fact. It is very unproven that Obama has spent well also.

We weren't discussing whether or not the spending is necessary or that the money was 'spent well.' That's a personal opinion, and I am not interested in your opinion on this matter. This does not challenge my original contention that the deficit was not quadrupled by Obama, and I doubt even doubled.

Quote:

On both the count of the amount and how it wasspent Obama's spending was not preordained. He is responsible for what he has spent and how it has been spent, the numbers stand. You can't take a eraser to the figures like you want to do.

I don't need to take an eraser to anything; I'm not decrying the spending the way you seem to be.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@kickycan,

kickycan wrote:

. . . He'll get to the gays eventually; in case nobody has noticed, the guy's been kind of busy with more important issues, like saving the country from financial collapse, restoring our image in the world, and dealing with annoying Republican pests, such as the one in the clip below....

Yes. Obama is busy.

Busy . . . like pretending to wrap up two wars and to bring our soldiers home while pressuring Congress to appropriate another 100 billion to fund the war effort;

Busy . . . like giving billions of dollars to the very people who caused the financial collapse and begging these same people to grudgingly accept a minimal amount of meaningless regulation which still allows the foxes to be in charge of the chicken coop;

Busy . . . like espousing the virtues of transparency in government while choosing secrecy over disclosure time and time and time again. See Glenn Greenwald's article, "Obama and transparency: judge for yourself."

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/

0 Replies

are the liberals sad about Obama?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know