Obama '08?

@Cycloptichorn,

ican won't be able to provide a good answer for your q. LOL

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

I could have swore that you guys used to claim that governing by poll was the wrong way to go. In fact, I know that I could bring up posts by you and other Republicans on this board stating exactly that.

So why do you know believe that Obama should do that which you claimed Bush was right for NOT doing?

I made no reference to polls in my post.

I do not believe the President, the Congress, or the Supreme Court should govern by polls.

I do believe our Pesident should govern according to what is in the best interests of the American people. However, Obama pledged to persist in his objectives regardless of whether a majority of Americans want him to or not. That is, Obama declared he will pursue his objectives, whether or not a majority of Americans choose to replace those members of Congress who vote for what Obama says he wants, and regardless of whether or not he is replaced by a majority of Americans. That's regardless of legal elections. It is not regardless of polls.

Whatever Bush was right or wrong for doing or not doing is best evaluated by the actual and/or probable consequences of what Bush did and did not do. A poll on this subject is irrelevant to deciding what's in the best interest of Americans.

The same applies to Obama. Whatever Obama is right or wrong for doing or not doing is best evaluated by the actual and/or probable consequences of what Obama did and did not do. A poll on this subject is irrelevant to deciding what's in the best interest of Americans. Establishing those programs that will ultimately lead to a complete replacement of our Constitutional Republic and Capitalist Economy with a Demagogic Autocracy and Wealth Redistributionist Economy is not in the best interest of Americans. It steals our lawfully obtained property, our liberty and our opportunity to improve our conditions.

1 Reply

@ican711nm,

You have proven yourself to be incompetent when it comes to evaluating the results of Presidential decisions, Ican. Your predictions have consistently been wrong and your understanding of both history and tax policy are sophomoric at best.

I just watched a video of Obama at the Republican House retreat in Baltimore taking questions, and he mopped the floor with those sad sacks. It was brutal.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

I just watched a video of Obama at the Republican House retreat in Baltimore taking questions, and he mopped the floor with those sad sacks. It was brutal.

Yeah, like the way he mopped the floor with the assembled Supreme Court Justices (there as a courtesy to him) during the SOU speech when our sainted Harvard Law School grad grossly misrepresented the effects of their decision to strike down the McCain-Feingold law as permitting foreign corporations to pour unlimited money into our election campaigns. It turns out he was dead wrong.

Frankly the President increasingly appears as a desperate, but largely incompetent bully, trying very hard to bluster his way through hard times of his own making. (Perhaps you detect an affinity there.)

The latest is the sadly amusing pretense that it is the Congress that is forcing him to relocate the forthcoming terrorist trials out of New York. It was never a good idea and there was no reason not to use Military Tribunals in the cases of avowed soldiers in a private army that has openly declared both its war on us, and its intention of continuing exactly the same attacks as those of which they are accused. However our over-inflated, self-obsessed, sainted hero has made his declarations - he will close Guantanamo; He will "restore the rule of Law (i.e. those modalities which he prefers)"; etc.etc. Ths increasingly evident sad fact is he hasn't done anything but talk.

1 Reply

I wonder whether any of you saw this on TV. Obama just finished taking questions [and barbs] from a Republican caucas. The overall theme was on whether the parties can come together on the issues.

To me, it appeared that the Reps set themselves up. They raised every Rep issue one can imagine (e.g., lack of administration transparency, failure to consider Rep bills, etc.), and Obama seemed to knock every Rep question or bitch out of the park. It was very, very, interesting.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

I just watched a video of Obama at the Republican House retreat in Baltimore taking questions, and he mopped the floor with those sad sacks. It was brutal.

Yeah, like the way he mopped the floor with the assembled Supreme Court Justices (there as a courtesy to him) during the SOU speech when our sainted Harvard Law School grad grossly misrepresented the effects of their decision to strike down the McCain-Feingold law as permitting foreign corporations to pour unlimited money into our election campaigns. It turns out he was dead wrong.

No, he was dead right. Or perhaps you can show how foreign corps are being barred from doing this?

He was right to chastise them for this horrible decision.

Quote:

Frankly the President increasingly appears as a desperate, but largely incompetent bully, trying very hard to bluster his way through hard times of his own making. (Perhaps you detect an affinity there.)

This is nothing more than carping on your part, b/c you're still - after all this time - not used to being in the minority. And I would remind you that the vast majority of the 'hard times' that Obama has had to face were not of his own making at all, but instead the fault of the previous administration - a position shared by the majority of Americans and one that I can back up with polling data, something that you never lower yourself to do.

Do you realize that your party and the ideas you support are in the minority, and that the other party's ideas - for now - rule the day? It appears not. The fact that Obama hasn't thrown his hands up and declared himself to be a supporter of Republican ideas isn't a sign of 'bluster' or 'bullying' at all, but strength on his part.

Quote:

The latest is the sadly amusing pretense that it is the Congress that is forcing him to relocate the forthcoming terrorist trials out of New York. It was never a good idea and there was no reason not to use Military Tribunals in the cases of avowed soldiers in a private army that has openly declared both its war on us, and its intention of continuing exactly the same attacks as those of which they are accused. However our over-inflated, self-obsessed, sainted hero has made his declarations - he will close Guantanamo; He will "restore the rule of Law (i.e. those modalities which he prefers)"; etc.etc. Ths increasingly evident sad fact is he hasn't done anything but talk.

You are incorrect. As I said the other day, he has had more legislative success in the first year than any president since Reagan.

I am starting to find your constant negativity re: the president, coupled with a lack of willingness to provide supporting documentation for your endless string of assertions, to be rather boring, George. Suffice it to say that we all know that you don't like Obama; unless you are bringing something new to the discussion why are you bothering repeating yourself over and over in such an Ican-ish fashion?

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@Advocate,

Do you think your hero was effective in his avowed purpose of persuading them to cooperate??

Isn't it odd that with the largest majorities in both houses of Congress enjoyed by any president or Administration (of either party) in many decades, that our debater-in-chief has been so uniquely ineffective in pursuing his legislative agenda?

It can't be his fault or that of the legislative leaders of his party. it must be the opposition, ... or perhaps the public. Maybe he needs a new opposition or a new public.

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

...
Do you realize that your party and the ideas you support are in the minority, and that the other party's ideas - for now - rule the day? It appears not. The fact that Obama hasn't thrown his hands up and declared himself to be a supporter of Republican ideas isn't a sign of 'bluster' or 'bullying' at all, but strength on his part.
Cycloptichorn

In your dreams.

He is in a downward spiral. His legislative agenda is toast.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
...
Do you realize that your party and the ideas you support are in the minority, and that the other party's ideas - for now - rule the day? It appears not. The fact that Obama hasn't thrown his hands up and declared himself to be a supporter of Republican ideas isn't a sign of 'bluster' or 'bullying' at all, but strength on his part.
Cycloptichorn

In your dreams.

He is in a downward spiral. His legislative agenda is toast.

You're simply incorrect, George. And once again you have resorted to assertion instead of reasoned argument.

Whistling past the graveyard. I'm forced to ask whether or not you even watched the clip in question, as well.

Let me ask you some factual questions:

Who do you believe polling data will show that the public trusts more to handle decisions - Obama or the Republicans in Congress?

Same question re: financial reform.

Do you believe that Obama has been more successful in getting legislation passed in his first year than Bush 1 or 2 and Clinton, or not?

Do you realize that your party is still in the minority, or not - and that the voters still blame the Republican party for the problems we face?

Do you believe that presidents typically, when faced with difficulties from Congress, throw up their hands and join in with the opposing positions?

I can provide data to give you conclusive answers to all these questions. Have you the guts to answer them, let alone provide data to back up your positions? I suspect not.

---

I agree with Yglesias' take on the Obama appearance today:

http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2010/01/obama-at-the-house-gop-retreat.php

Quote:

Obama at the House GOP Retreat

I only caught the tail end of it, but just now Barack Obama made an appearance at the House GOP retreat. I assume he opened with some remarks (didn’t see ‘em) and then stood at a podium for a Q&A with House Republicans. It was sort of like Prime Minister’s Questions and it revealed, simply put, that Barack Obama is a lot smarter and better-informed than his antagonists. A lot. He very calmly and coolly dismantled them.

To me, personally, it’s not a surprise. I debated policy with Mike Pence once and the guy is a stone-cold idiot. That was a years ago and I’ve been surprised since then to learn that conservatives consider him an unusually sharp policy mind and I take leading rightwingers at their word about that. But it’s the kind of thing that I think most Americans aren’t aware of. Obama knows what he’s talking about. A lot of the members of Congress you see on TV all the time talking smack don’t. That’s not always clear to people since the TV anchors interviewing them usually also don’t know what they’re talking about. Judd Gregg’s whining freakout on MSNBC yesterday punctured the illusion of calm confidence and so did Obama’s back-and-forth.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Just got done watching all the Q&A. Wow. He smacked 'em.

And what's amazing, is that his answers were quite well constructed and eloquently presented - without the use of a teleprompter! Some here seem don't believe that such a thing is possible.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Would you mind linking that for us?

1 Reply

@OCCOM BILL,

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Would you mind linking that for us?

http://www.c-spanarchives.org/program/ID/218836

Link'd. There's a long speech at the beginning which was nice to watch but not as fun as the last part.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Thanks. No time now, but I'd like to catch up later. It just dawned on me that I can probably cue it up on my phone for the ride home! Cheers!

1 Reply

@OCCOM BILL,

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Thanks. No time now, but I'd like to catch up later. It just dawned on me that I can probably cue it up on my phone for the ride home! Cheers!

It's also being re-broadcast on CSPAN tonight if you want to watch from the comfort of de couch.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

I am starting to find your constant negativity re: the president, coupled with a lack of willingness to provide supporting documentation for your endless string of assertions, to be rather boring, George. Suffice it to say that we all know that you don't like Obama; unless you are bringing something new to the discussion why are you bothering repeating yourself over and over in such an Ican-ish fashion?
Cycloptichorn

This somewhat juvenile reaction is notable chiefly for its lack of substance. The sort of retort used by one who has no real points to make.

That you may find my comments boring neither encourages nor dissuades me. The fact that you appear to summon so much thinly veiled feeling in reaction to them suggests the contrary may be true.

Your habit of positing a burden of proof (for obvious facts) on your interlocutor, but not yourself, is a bit thin.

The fact is that I have come to mistrust Obama's character only recently. For a long while I had doubts and suspicions, but held off waiting for events.

I note you are very selective in your choice of examples for the supposed contemporary dominance of Democrat/Obama political ideas and proposals. Bashing bankers is in, but you failed to include the Health care and Energy programs that have occupied so much of the public debate for the past year. Both are now dead letters. The proposals to rewrite legislation governing the unionization of new industries hasn't even gotten off the ground. The rest is mere public distraction.

Do you believe there is vast public support for the Democrat's health care proposals? Cap & Trade ? Do you believe Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid are held in high regard by the public ? Do you believe that President Obama's political situation now is materially better than was Clinton's at this point in his first term?

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

From the Politico write-up on this, you can tell who had the upper hand quite clearly:

Quote:

Mid-way through the questions and answers, Pence said that there would be just a few more questions.

Obama said he wasn’t in any hurry to leave.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/32225_Page2.html#ixzz0e2EVG8sW

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

My machine won't handle that, but it should be up on youtube soon! Cool! I just figured out how to get a wasted hour of my day back!

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

I will first note for the record that you chose to ignore my questions. I suspect this is because you know quite well that you can't answer them in a fashion which supports your assertions, and that you have no evidence to present with which to back your assertions up.

Far from your claim that I have 'no real points to make,' I have consistently raised points of discussion and offered to provide evidence to back my points up. You have failed to take advantage of this - or intentionally chose not to.

Once again this is completely consistent with your typical behavior or making assertions which you can't back up with facts, and then running from the conversation when called out on this.

Quote:

Your habit of positing a burden of proof (for obvious facts) on your interlocutor, but not yourself, is a bit thin.

Proof to back up assertions are available upon request. The fact that you don't even bother asking me to source my arguments is an admission that you know you are wrong. If you feel I am wrong - challenge me! I dare you. Because we both know that you don't have the balls to provide facts to support your assertions. In this aspect of argumentation you have shown deficiency, sir.

Quote:

I note you are very selective in your choice of examples for the supposed contemporary dominance of Democrat/Obama political ideas and proposals. Bashing bankers is in, but you failed to include the Health care and Energy programs that have occupied so much of the public debate for the past year. Both are now dead letters. The proposals to rewrite legislation governing the unionization of new industries has'nt even gotten off the ground. The rest is mere public distraction.

I will grant you the energy issue - but Health Care? C'mon! I have consistently said that polling shows the public supporting EVERY ASPECT of the original Dem plan. I can still provide you with this data.

You call other things 'public distraction' because they are pernicious to your argument. You cannot wave your hand and pretend that legislation doesn't exist when it does, sorry.

Quote:

Do you believe there is vast public support for the Democrat's health care proposals? Cap & Trade ? Do you believe Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid are held in high regard by the public ? Do you believe that President Obama's political situation now is materially better than was Clinton's at this point in his first term?

It is considered rude to ask questions when you refuse to answer others' questions, George. Provide answers to my questions if you desire them for yours.

Your argumentation is entirely by assertion and is weak. You can provide no facts or sources to back up your statements. Whenever you are asked to so, you get all huffy and turn to further assertions and character attacks upon the questioner. Do these seem like qualities of a strong debater to you?

I am forced to ask: do you even know how to copy a link into A2k? Perhaps it's a technical limitation that you are dealing with. I'd be more than happy to educate you in this regard if you need the help.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

I will grant you the energy issue - but Health Care? C'mon! I have consistently said that polling shows the public supporting EVERY ASPECT of the original Dem plan. I can still provide you with this data.
Cycloptichorn

Perhaps you would like to update us with your latest forecast for the passage of this legislation, which enjoys such vast public support ... in every aspect.

Of course it could be an evil Republican legislative conspiracy that is preventing the passage of this eagerly desired legislation. If so then we will likely see even stronger Democrat majorities in both houses of Congress after the November elections, and the passage of this wonderful program in the next Congress. (Don't hold your breath)

2 Replies

Hinkle: Talking Down to the Public Will Surely Work . . .
A. BARTON HINKLE TIMES-DISPATCH COLUMNIST
Published: January 29, 2010

This is a complex issue, and the longer it was debated, the more skeptical people became. I take my share of the blame for not explaining it more clearly to the American people.
--Barack Obama, State of the Union.

There's a lot in the bill that people are going to like. It's just a question of understanding it.
--ABC's Cokie Roberts, Dec. 20.

What are the immediate plans for recalibrating the message or intensifying the message to explain better to the American people what you're trying to do?
--Question to White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, Jan. 20.

It mighty big of man with nice voice to take blame like that. Him not need to. Head honchos not often take blame. Most times after big screw-up, head honchos say they have "full confidence" in someone who work for them -- right before pushing someone off edge of cliff, or letting someone twist "slowly, slowly" in wind, like tricky Nixon guy did with man who ran FBI.

Man with nice voice not like those other head honchos. Him bring change to Washington already, see?

But him right. Him not explain health care good. Use too many big words. Say too many compound-complex sentences. Confuse American people. American people not want that. American people want simple explanation. Simpler the better.

Me feel kind of sorry. It must really get on nerves for man with nice voice and people on his side, like lady on TV and cheerleaders in White House press pool. Why can't lamebrain American people get idea through thick skulls? Them not know how to make choices in own best interests! Need enlightened leaders to make choices for them. (Enlightened = smart. Me look this up in thing called "dictionary." Dictionary good! Try sometime!)

Want example? Take mammogram fight. (Mammogram is thing where doctor squish tender woman part really hard and take picture. Owie!) Last year U.S. Preventive Services Task Force say women not need mammogram until age 50. Say squishing younger women not very clinically effective, so not save many lives. Say sometimes "false positives" scare women. This not good. Smart people must protect silly women, make sure they not get scared! Experts say, from cruising altitude of 32,000 feet saving 12,000 lives over course of 10 years just not worth it. Country should not waste money like that. (Can hardly see someone from that far up anyway.) But crazy right-wing TeaParty people go around saying things like: Well, if it my life or my daughter's life, maybe me feel different. Maybe me should be one to decide to get squished or not. This just show crazy right-wing Tea-Party people always thinking about themselves.

There so many things man with nice voice need to explain gooder. Like, if some people still need health insurance, why not just give them insurance voucher, like housing voucher or food stamps? Why put entire U.S. medical system in Cuisinart and set on Liquefy?

How come House bill create 111 new boards, commissions, and programs? How come, if point is to give insurance, House bill raise big chunk of revenue by fining people without insurance? How that help anyone? This seem crazy to knuckle-dragging trailer-park people, who not know no better. And how come Medicaid and Medicare not doing the job? Isn't that what they for? And if they not do job, then why should people think even bigger program will?

Many American people too stupid to see answers to questions like these, even though they totally obvious.

Man with nice voice also need to explain why it so bad that U.S. spend more on health care than other countries. U.S. spend more on clothes and iPods, too. People in U.S. have more what called "discretionary income." Only spend small share of paycheck on food and rent, so lots left over. Old man want to get knee fixed, why stop him? Him want to buy big new tender woman parts to make hot young trophy wife even hotter, what wrong with that? Seem kind of silly, sure. But man with nice voice need to point out where in Constitution it say White House get to make that call for him.

Stupid American people have strange mad love for Constitution. Crazy right-wing Tea-Party people always making big fat deal out of it. Want to know where it say Congress can make people buy insurance. Freaky house speaker think that Constitution business nonsense. "Are you serious?" she want to know. Crazy right-wing Tea-Party people dead serious. Say government that can make you buy insurance can make you do anything, anything at all. Some even ask what crazy right-wing president and Congress with that kind of power might do. Me not like to think about that!

Whole issue make brain hurt. Good thing man with nice voice in charge. Him have right ideas. Just need to try new angle, that all. Talk slower. Talk louder. Use small words. Treat American people like kid who got held back in elementary school. That bound to work eventually.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know