cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Tue 16 Jun, 2009 04:39 pm
@dyslexia,
We sort of pay attention to what the media says about Rush, because he's a spokesman for many conservatives who live by his words. We can see evidence of that right here on a2k.
H2O MAN
 
  -1  
Tue 16 Jun, 2009 04:56 pm


I'm not a ditto head and I've not seen evidence that there are many here on A2K...
au1929
 
  1  
Tue 16 Jun, 2009 05:04 pm
The Obameter: Tracking Obama's Campaign Promises
PolitiFact has compiled about 500 promises that Barack Obama made during the campaign and is tracking their progress on our Obameter. We rate their status as No Action, In the Works or Stalled. Once we find action is completed, we rate them Promise Kept, Compromise or Promise Broken.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Tue 16 Jun, 2009 05:08 pm
@cicerone imposter,
I would agree with you, CI, about Rush and Cheney et al so vocally espousing the conservative Repub view. The leadership of the party wants to move, I think, more towards the center. It is going to be tough.
In the Dem party, there are folks (like me) over on the liberal left who are not too happy, but who can appreciate that capturing the middle ground while the Repubs are in a bit of a pickle is a good idea.

Heads up: here in VA we have a race for Gov. Creigh Deeds (D) vs Bob McConnel (R). Govs in VA serve only one 4-year term and we tend to flip from Rep to Dem and back frequently. Deeds leads 47-41 right now, in a state that went for Obama. But I sense that, by Nov, it will become much closer. Deeds may be a mite too liberal for some moderate Dems and Indy's.
okie
 
  1  
Tue 16 Jun, 2009 09:14 pm
@H2O MAN,
H2O MAN wrote:



I'm not a ditto head and I've not seen evidence that there are many here on A2K...

But I think Rush has more credibility than Obama, and Obama has alot more power to run the country into the ground. Most people that criticize Rush seldom cite anything that he is wrong on, but he is just somebody they love to hate. There are many many conservative, successful talk show hosts, but few if any successful liberal talk shows, the reason being their philosophy does not hold up well under discussion, plus liberals are largely poorly informed and would rather stick their heads in the sand and play ostrich than listen to policy discussions. Liberals are emotionally based, not fact based. Thus liberal policies do not survive the light of day.

To take the point a bit further, that is precisely why Obama's campaign was all about generalities, not specifics. Notice now that specific policies are failing miserably, which is not a surprise to conservatives.
0 Replies
 
rabel22
 
  1  
Tue 16 Jun, 2009 11:27 pm
@dyslexia,
Every time I try to listen to Rush I only last a couple of minutes then I have to rush to the bathroom to upchuck.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Wed 17 Jun, 2009 01:42 am
I notice Obama does not wish to "meddle" in the affairs of Iran. I suppose he doesn't feel the same about Israel, does he? He seems to have no problem with meddling there. He tries to tell them what to do there, but he would never dream of suggesting that fair elections should be held in Iran, oh no, that would be "meddling." And he says the Supreme Leader of Iran has deep concerns about the civil unrest, etc. Well, isn't that brilliant of Obama!
Foxfyre
 
  2  
Wed 17 Jun, 2009 07:20 am
@realjohnboy,
realjohnboy wrote:

I would agree with you, CI, about Rush and Cheney et al so vocally espousing the conservative Repub view. The leadership of the party wants to move, I think, more towards the center. It is going to be tough.
In the Dem party, there are folks (like me) over on the liberal left who are not too happy, but who can appreciate that capturing the middle ground while the Repubs are in a bit of a pickle is a good idea.


Personally I don't think the GOP has much recognized leadership right now. Yes you have some popular conservative talk show hosts who don't guide 'conservative thought' but are mostly speaking what their audiences are already thinking. They are NOT seens as the GOP leaders by most of their audiences, however.

Liberal Republicans such as Olympia Snow are low profile and rarely much in the public eye. Ditto for the extreme libertarian Republicans such as Ron Paul. The true modern conservatives are barely known. So those clips of Republicans on the evening news or those solicited to be talking heads on the cable news programs will too often be religious far right wingers or the neocons such as Newt Gingrich.

That distorts considerably what the rank and file 'conservative' American mostly thinks, believes, and wants from government. Obama is far left of much of his consituency, and those 'talking GOP heads' are also missing the mark with much of theirs.

I don't know if there is sufficient time before the next election for what I believe to be the disconnected majority to organize and make a difference. I remain hopeful, however. I think the average person who tilts left and the average person who tilts right in the USA probably share more convictions than they differ. All we need is to raise up a leader with the vision and integrity of conviction to tap into that large American majority and lead us back to common sense rather than what either the GOP or the Democrats have offered us lately.
Cycloptichorn
 
  3  
Wed 17 Jun, 2009 08:48 am
@okie,
okie wrote:

I notice Obama does not wish to "meddle" in the affairs of Iran. I suppose he doesn't feel the same about Israel, does he? He seems to have no problem with meddling there. He tries to tell them what to do there, but he would never dream of suggesting that fair elections should be held in Iran, oh no, that would be "meddling." And he says the Supreme Leader of Iran has deep concerns about the civil unrest, etc. Well, isn't that brilliant of Obama!


Well, we give Israel billions in direct aid and billions more in military surplus. That comes with strings, like everything in life.

If Israel doesn't want us meddling, perhaps they should refuse the money from now on. Think they will, Okie?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  0  
Wed 17 Jun, 2009 10:19 am
@Foxfyre,
Quote:
Personally I don't think the GOP has much recognized leadership right now


That's been the case for over forty years.
JTT
 
  1  
Wed 17 Jun, 2009 10:21 am
@H2O MAN,
Quote:
I'm not a ditto head and I've not seen evidence that there are many here on A2K...


Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing

0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Wed 17 Jun, 2009 10:31 am
@JTT,
Unless we can call Bush-Cheney "leadership!" LOL
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Wed 17 Jun, 2009 12:35 pm
I think I am beginning to agree with ican, impeach Obama. That looks like our best hope. Which is slim to none at the moment, but as he continues to screw things up, I hope it gains momentum. He is a monumental disaster, but it will take a while for the emotionally invested to admit it and make a U turn.
Cycloptichorn
 
  3  
Wed 17 Jun, 2009 01:05 pm
@okie,
okie wrote:

I think I am beginning to agree with ican, impeach Obama. That looks like our best hope. Which is slim to none at the moment, but as he continues to screw things up, I hope it gains momentum. He is a monumental disaster, but it will take a while for the emotionally invested to admit it and make a U turn.


Wow, Obama must really be screwing up, to get a neutral and reasonable guy like yourself to turn against him Rolling Eyes

I think that Obama is not a disaster; and the American public seems to agree with me so far. What is a disaster is the state of the Republican party; you have no clear leadership, direction or electoral plans. That must be depressing.

Cycloptichorn
okie
 
  1  
Wed 17 Jun, 2009 02:15 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Admit it, he is a total disaster. He is so linguiny spined that he can't even stand up for the people of Iran. He essentially defends the dictator and the supreme leader, blah blah, it is pathetic, cyclops. Pathetic, cyclops, while he continues to destroy the economy with stupid policies.

There are so many issues that its too much to even go into.

Impeach Obama, thats our only hope.
Advocate
 
  2  
Wed 17 Jun, 2009 02:27 pm
@okie,
I hate to say this, but you make a valid point. O is jumping into the Pal mess with both feet, trying to call the shots.

He should, of course, stay out of the Irananian matter. Iranians on both sides of the election issue would deeply resent O's involvement. The USA has a long and despicable history of meddling in that country's affairs, which is well known to the people.
okie
 
  1  
Wed 17 Jun, 2009 02:28 pm
@okie,
By the way, just pessimistic today about the economy, the country, with Obama driving. I hope it gets better, but I would not at all disagree with impeaching Obama with any credible reason, corruption, whatever, which we know he is corrupt, but just getting the goods is a big job with the main stream media worshiping him every day.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  0  
Wed 17 Jun, 2009 02:30 pm
@Advocate,
There is nothing wrong with Obama standing up and saying, fair elections are essential, and dictators are not healthy, whats wrong with that? Call it meddling, I call it standing up for whats right and proper, and decent.

By the way, Advocate, I hope you are watching, Obama will dump Israel overboard, count on it.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -1  
Wed 17 Jun, 2009 02:35 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:

okie wrote:

I think I am beginning to agree with ican, impeach Obama. That looks like our best hope. Which is slim to none at the moment, but as he continues to screw things up, I hope it gains momentum. He is a monumental disaster, but it will take a while for the emotionally invested to admit it and make a U turn.


Wow, Obama must really be screwing up, to get a neutral and reasonable guy like yourself to turn against him


Okie and Ican are not alone... Obama is not even close to delivering the Hope & Change as promised.

The sooner Obama and the career senators on both sides are booted out of power, the sooner this constitutional republic can begin healing.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Wed 17 Jun, 2009 02:49 pm
@okie,
okie wrote:

Admit it, he is a total disaster. He is so linguiny spined that he can't even stand up for the people of Iran. He essentially defends the dictator and the supreme leader, blah blah, it is pathetic, cyclops. Pathetic, cyclops, while he continues to destroy the economy with stupid policies.

There are so many issues that its too much to even go into.

Impeach Obama, thats our only hope.


Oh, the Iran thing, eh? I absolutely adore the way you look to right-wing websites for the 'Attack against Obama du jour.'

In order to respond to your point, I will link to the National Review Online, a very Conservative website, so that you will have absolutely no reason to blame the ideology of the writer for the complete smackdown of your position:

Quote:

To Meddle or Not to Meddle [Mark Krikorian]

A friend of a friend is an Iranian who works at VOA and said something that got me thinking: "The great thing about this is that no one can say the Americans did it." I may be reading more into this, but I think it points to a reason for us to stay out of the ferment in Iran that I don't think I've seen. It's not just that our involvement would give the mullahs a propaganda cudgel to use against the protesters in the battle for public opinion " the regime's propagandists are going to accuse us of meddling no matter what we do, as Michael pointed out (though our actions can make such an accusation more, or less, credible in the eyes of the Iranian public). But more importantly, it's the protesters themselves who need to see their movement as free of foreign influence. However much the "Great Satan" propaganda has made many Iranians sympathetic to America (remember the candlelight vigils after 9/11), they're still proud patriots who don't want to be seen by others " or to see themselves " as acting on the agendas of outsiders. Their victory would almost certainly be our victory, regardless of Mousavi's specific views, but it's a victory they have to win for themselves.


http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=M2ZmNWY1YzBjMzhhNDgyNzU4MDc3YWM2MmQ2OGQ1MmU=

Your extremely shallow analysis is reminiscent of McCain's belligerence vs. Russia during the election. You haven't put any real thought into what the effects would be; you simply wish the US to flail about, using our power in a bullying way, so that you can feel strong, or like we're 'doing something.'

What you describe is the opposite of wisdom; the effects would not be what you think they would. And stuff like this is why I don't take your criticisms of Obama too seriously. You haven't put any deep thought into them whatsover.

Cycloptichorn
 

Related Topics

So....Will Biden Be VP? - Question by blueveinedthrobber
My view on Obama - Discussion by McGentrix
Obama/ Love Him or Hate Him, We've Got Him - Discussion by Phoenix32890
Obama fumbles at Faith Forum - Discussion by slkshock7
Expert: Obama is not the antichrist - Discussion by joefromchicago
Obama's State of the Union - Discussion by maxdancona
Obama 2012? - Discussion by snood
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Obama '08?
  3. » Page 1285
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.18 seconds on 04/17/2025 at 03:56:33