Benjiminer Wrote:

UTEPDallas Wrote:

PirateMarv Wrote:

OptimisticOwl Wrote:

At Ease Wrote:Yeah, Obama seems a real pushover, given his unimpressive oratory skills and his promise to unilaterally send troops into Pakistan if any opportunity arises to wipe out Al Qaeda bases.

First, the idea of diplomacy is not to make speeches. It is to persuade the leader(s) of other countries to take actions they may not want to make. Oratory skills diminish in importance as the size of the audience diminishes and the political power of the individuals therein increases. His oratorical skills will be of much less use sitting across the table from a world leader than in front of a crowd of swooning schoolgirls. Just think, if only we had had a good speechifier, we could have avoided the Cold War, the Viet Nam war, 9-11, all those bad things.

Here is a quote from David Ignatius, whose area of expertise is foreign policy: "I fear that Mr. Obama is creating public expectations for a quick solution in Iraq that cannot responsibly be achieved".

This goes to my question of what happens when he disappoints. Remember, his strength is the 18-24 crowd, the skateboard and iPod gang with an attention span of 12 minutes. They get enthused really easily, lose interest just as quickly.

Since you have the link to the Obama blueprint for change, publish it here. Maybe a major media outlet will find it. That dadgum biased press cannot seem to find any substance, and they are FOR him.

I want to know:
1. WHAT is he going to change
2. FROM what
3. To what
4. Why
5. How

All Ronald Reagan ever did was make speeches. That is why Reagan got elected. He was a good communicator. John F. Kennedy got elected for the same reason. Ditto for Bill Clinton.

As far as the diplomacy goes, where did you get the impression that Barack Obama was unable to form coalitions to get things done? He was my State Senator in Illinois for a number years and he was always instrumental in getting budgets passed and drafting laws to ensure the rights of citizens. He is a big proponent of citizen rights.

Conversely, George "Da Decider" Bush has never seen a right that he did not attempt to trample over and we all know that he can not spell diplomacy. Under the "Decider's" watch, the USA has been reduced to being "Hazzard County." Cheney acts like "Boss Hogg" and "Da Decider" looks and acts like "Sheriff Roscoe P. Coltrane." This is how we look to the rest of the World, but for some reason you guys are acting like Obama will not improve our current standing in the World. I guess you guys must "misremember" a lot of stuff.

Post of the day!!!!

The Bush administration has been the most corrupt, inept, secretive and incompetent administration ever. The worst of the worst.....and it'll take a Democrat in the White House to fix all the aberrations left by our "brilliant" President. McCain won't stand a chance vs Hillary or Obama. Not even folks in his own party like him.

Not true at all, your ratings will go down the tubes after 7 years of getting slammed by the Liberal media day after day after day. People will soon get tired

"If you tell a lie a thousand times, it soon becomes the truth" -Joseph Gerbels- Nazy Minister of propaganda.

I can think of half a dozen presidents that were far worst than President Bush. Here is the list.

Some of the worst presidents of the second half of the 20th century.

1)Jimmy Carter. The peanut farmer was clueless when it came to national security and dealing with Muslim terrorists.

2)Lyndon Johnson. This guy had good intentions but like any Liberal idea while good in theory does not translate to real life. He helped to sistematically destroy the inner city family with welfare on demand policies and basically replaced the human father with the state father.

3) Sleek Willy Clinton. Need I say more?

First off, what is a Nazy?

Secondly, do you honestly think that there is anything worse than SENDING US TO WAR WITH THE WRONG COUNTRY??? I think Johnson was up there until Bush took the crown. Johnson kept us in a war where JFK was trying to get us out. But Bush has made mistake after mistake. Did you realize that before 9/11, Bush spent more time on vacation that any other President in American History? Bush has basically pissed on the constitution time and time again. What did Clinton piss on? Monica Lewinski? Not only is Bush one of the worst Presidents in the history of the United States, he is one of the dumbest. Every year it seems to be something even worse. Whether its sitting in front of kids reading books while the WTC is being bombed or naming unqualified people to the highest offices (Miers-Supreme Court, Brownie-FEMA), etc. and he still thinks that history will look favorably on him in 10 years. What has he EVER done on his own that hasn't blown up in his face? What accolades has he received? Carter has at least won the Nobel Peace Prize, Regan introduced "Reganomics" and ended the Cold War, Bush Sr. stopped Hussein from taking over the Middle East after he entered Kuwait. I'm not going to get into it, but every President has at least done something positive. Bush hasn't done squat. I thought he was off to a good start when he put very smart and competent people in his cabinet and in leadership roles, but all of them were gone within 4 years. You know, I never thought that there would be anyone dumber than Dan Quayle in the Presidency or VP, but Bush blows him out of the water...

Benjiminer Wrote:

UTEPDallas Wrote:

PirateMarv Wrote:

OptimisticOwl Wrote:

At Ease Wrote:Yeah, Obama seems a real pushover, given his unimpressive oratory skills and his promise to unilaterally send troops into Pakistan if any opportunity arises to wipe out Al Qaeda bases.

First, the idea of diplomacy is not to make speeches. It is to persuade the leader(s) of other countries to take actions they may not want to make. Oratory skills diminish in importance as the size of the audience diminishes and the political power of the individuals therein increases. His oratorical skills will be of much less use sitting across the table from a world leader than in front of a crowd of swooning schoolgirls. Just think, if only we had had a good speechifier, we could have avoided the Cold War, the Viet Nam war, 9-11, all those bad things.

Here is a quote from David Ignatius, whose area of expertise is foreign policy: "I fear that Mr. Obama is creating public expectations for a quick solution in Iraq that cannot responsibly be achieved".

This goes to my question of what happens when he disappoints. Remember, his strength is the 18-24 crowd, the skateboard and iPod gang with an attention span of 12 minutes. They get enthused really easily, lose interest just as quickly.

Since you have the link to the Obama blueprint for change, publish it here. Maybe a major media outlet will find it. That dadgum biased press cannot seem to find any substance, and they are FOR him.

I want to know:
1. WHAT is he going to change
2. FROM what
3. To what
4. Why
5. How

All Ronald Reagan ever did was make speeches. That is why Reagan got elected. He was a good communicator. John F. Kennedy got elected for the same reason. Ditto for Bill Clinton.

As far as the diplomacy goes, where did you get the impression that Barack Obama was unable to form coalitions to get things done? He was my State Senator in Illinois for a number years and he was always instrumental in getting budgets passed and drafting laws to ensure the rights of citizens. He is a big proponent of citizen rights.

Conversely, George "Da Decider" Bush has never seen a right that he did not attempt to trample over and we all know that he can not spell diplomacy. Under the "Decider's" watch, the USA has been reduced to being "Hazzard County." Cheney acts like "Boss Hogg" and "Da Decider" looks and acts like "Sheriff Roscoe P. Coltrane." This is how we look to the rest of the World, but for some reason you guys are acting like Obama will not improve our current standing in the World. I guess you guys must "misremember" a lot of stuff.

Post of the day!!!!

The Bush administration has been the most corrupt, inept, secretive and incompetent administration ever. The worst of the worst.....and it'll take a Democrat in the White House to fix all the aberrations left by our "brilliant" President. McCain won't stand a chance vs Hillary or Obama. Not even folks in his own party like him.

Not true at all, your ratings will go down the tubes after 7 years of getting slammed by the Liberal media day after day after day. People will soon get tired

"If you tell a lie a thousand times, it soon becomes the truth" -Joseph Gerbels- Nazy Minister of propaganda.

So do any of these ring a bell:

"They have weapons of mass destruction."

"They will meet us in the streets as liberators."

"I am an ex-alcholic."

Benjiminer Wrote:

youngalum Wrote:

RebelKev Wrote:

youngalum Wrote:Yet, you were the one who used racial charged terms and saying things like they belong on anyone's plantation.

What racially-charged terms? As for the plantation innuendo, that comes from the left. They're the ones that claim any black conservative is an "Uncle Tom", it isn't the other way around.

Sure, Mr. "House Negros" and all. You are pure and evil free from the bigotry you wrote. I am done with you.

I agree with 100% of what RebelKev has stated, and happened to be of Hispanic heritage, does that make me a racist also?? Get a clue leftist baffoon.

So are you saying that Hispanic's can't be racist? Because if you are, then you are nuts!

BTW, if you are truly Hispanic then you know that Hispanics are not one single group of people, but are actually composed of several groups, including a large number of people of African heritage. Even other Hispanics (the Black ones) from places like the Dominican, Guatemala, Puerto Rico, Brazil and Cuba, talk about the racism that exists amongst Hispanics, especially amongst Mexicans and White Cubans. So you might want to reprise your statement.

TheGimp Wrote:

Benjiminer Wrote:

UTEPDallas Wrote:

PirateMarv Wrote:

OptimisticOwl Wrote:

At Ease Wrote:Yeah, Obama seems a real pushover, given his unimpressive oratory skills and his promise to unilaterally send troops into Pakistan if any opportunity arises to wipe out Al Qaeda bases.

First, the idea of diplomacy is not to make speeches. It is to persuade the leader(s) of other countries to take actions they may not want to make. Oratory skills diminish in importance as the size of the audience diminishes and the political power of the individuals therein increases. His oratorical skills will be of much less use sitting across the table from a world leader than in front of a crowd of swooning schoolgirls. Just think, if only we had had a good speechifier, we could have avoided the Cold War, the Viet Nam war, 9-11, all those bad things.

Here is a quote from David Ignatius, whose area of expertise is foreign policy: "I fear that Mr. Obama is creating public expectations for a quick solution in Iraq that cannot responsibly be achieved".

This goes to my question of what happens when he disappoints. Remember, his strength is the 18-24 crowd, the skateboard and iPod gang with an attention span of 12 minutes. They get enthused really easily, lose interest just as quickly.

Since you have the link to the Obama blueprint for change, publish it here. Maybe a major media outlet will find it. That dadgum biased press cannot seem to find any substance, and they are FOR him.

I want to know:
1. WHAT is he going to change
2. FROM what
3. To what
4. Why
5. How

All Ronald Reagan ever did was make speeches. That is why Reagan got elected. He was a good communicator. John F. Kennedy got elected for the same reason. Ditto for Bill Clinton.

As far as the diplomacy goes, where did you get the impression that Barack Obama was unable to form coalitions to get things done? He was my State Senator in Illinois for a number years and he was always instrumental in getting budgets passed and drafting laws to ensure the rights of citizens. He is a big proponent of citizen rights.

Conversely, George "Da Decider" Bush has never seen a right that he did not attempt to trample over and we all know that he can not spell diplomacy. Under the "Decider's" watch, the USA has been reduced to being "Hazzard County." Cheney acts like "Boss Hogg" and "Da Decider" looks and acts like "Sheriff Roscoe P. Coltrane." This is how we look to the rest of the World, but for some reason you guys are acting like Obama will not improve our current standing in the World. I guess you guys must "misremember" a lot of stuff.

Post of the day!!!!

The Bush administration has been the most corrupt, inept, secretive and incompetent administration ever. The worst of the worst.....and it'll take a Democrat in the White House to fix all the aberrations left by our "brilliant" President. McCain won't stand a chance vs Hillary or Obama. Not even folks in his own party like him.

Not true at all, your ratings will go down the tubes after 7 years of getting slammed by the Liberal media day after day after day. People will soon get tired

"If you tell a lie a thousand times, it soon becomes the truth" -Joseph Gerbels- Nazy Minister of propaganda.

I can think of half a dozen presidents that were far worst than President Bush. Here is the list.

Some of the worst presidents of the second half of the 20th century.

1)Jimmy Carter. The peanut farmer was clueless when it came to national security and dealing with Muslim terrorists.

2)Lyndon Johnson. This guy had good intentions but like any Liberal idea while good in theory does not translate to real life. He helped to sistematically destroy the inner city family with welfare on demand policies and basically replaced the human father with the state father.

3) Sleek Willy Clinton. Need I say more?

First off, what is a Nazy?

Secondly, do you honestly think that there is anything worse than SENDING US TO WAR WITH THE WRONG COUNTRY??? I think Johnson was up there until Bush took the crown. Johnson kept us in a war where JFK was trying to get us out. But Bush has made mistake after mistake. Did you realize that before 9/11, Bush spent more time on vacation that any other President in American History? Bush has basically pissed on the constitution time and time again. What did Clinton piss on? Monica Lewinski? Not only is Bush one of the worst Presidents in the history of the United States, he is one of the dumbest. Every year it seems to be something even worse. Whether its sitting in front of kids reading books while the WTC is being bombed or naming unqualified people to the highest offices (Miers-Supreme Court, Brownie-FEMA), etc. and he still thinks that history will look favorably on him in 10 years. What has he EVER done on his own that hasn't blown up in his face? What accolades has he received? Carter has at least won the Nobel Peace Prize, Regan introduced "Reganomics" and ended the Cold War, Bush Sr. stopped Hussein from taking over the Middle East after he entered Kuwait. I'm not going to get into it, but every President has at least done something positive. Bush hasn't done squat. I thought he was off to a good start when he put very smart and competent people in his cabinet and in leadership roles, but all of them were gone within 4 years. You know, I never thought that there would be anyone dumber than Dan Quayle in the Presidency or VP, but Bush blows him out of the water...

Gimp,

I agree with eveything you wrote and I will add a little more. Regardless of a party that a President belongs too, he is usally able to garner at least a modicum of respect from the other party. As a Democrat I can state that Nixon was very bright, but extremely paranoid. I can state that Reagan was a good speaker that could motivate people. Ford was a calming influence, but he was thrust into a horrible situation. Bush, Sr., was cynical and snippy, but he was at least smart enough to listen to his advisors and not invade Baghdad during the first Gulf War.

Hardly anyone, including serious thinking Republicans, consider Bush a good president. In fact there is a general consensus amongst almost everyone, except the most delusional Republicans (The Rush Limbaugh, Fox Noise crowd, et al), that Bush Jr., is perhaps the worst President of all time, or at the minimum at least in recent memory.

Jimmy Carter was a micro-manager, but every Republican with any sense, will acknowledge that Carter was light years ahead of Bush, Jr. It is not even close. Bush Jr.'s approval rating is at the lowest level of any sitting President. The man's approval rating shows that over 70% of the Country does not approve of his work. So there are clearly a lot of Republicans that agree with the Democrats, in believing that Bush Jr., is a very bad President.

TheGimp Wrote:

Benjiminer Wrote:

UTEPDallas Wrote:

PirateMarv Wrote:

OptimisticOwl Wrote:

At Ease Wrote:Yeah, Obama seems a real pushover, given his unimpressive oratory skills and his promise to unilaterally send troops into Pakistan if any opportunity arises to wipe out Al Qaeda bases.

First, the idea of diplomacy is not to make speeches. It is to persuade the leader(s) of other countries to take actions they may not want to make. Oratory skills diminish in importance as the size of the audience diminishes and the political power of the individuals therein increases. His oratorical skills will be of much less use sitting across the table from a world leader than in front of a crowd of swooning schoolgirls. Just think, if only we had had a good speechifier, we could have avoided the Cold War, the Viet Nam war, 9-11, all those bad things.

Here is a quote from David Ignatius, whose area of expertise is foreign policy: "I fear that Mr. Obama is creating public expectations for a quick solution in Iraq that cannot responsibly be achieved".

This goes to my question of what happens when he disappoints. Remember, his strength is the 18-24 crowd, the skateboard and iPod gang with an attention span of 12 minutes. They get enthused really easily, lose interest just as quickly.

Since you have the link to the Obama blueprint for change, publish it here. Maybe a major media outlet will find it. That dadgum biased press cannot seem to find any substance, and they are FOR him.

I want to know:
1. WHAT is he going to change
2. FROM what
3. To what
4. Why
5. How

All Ronald Reagan ever did was make speeches. That is why Reagan got elected. He was a good communicator. John F. Kennedy got elected for the same reason. Ditto for Bill Clinton.

As far as the diplomacy goes, where did you get the impression that Barack Obama was unable to form coalitions to get things done? He was my State Senator in Illinois for a number years and he was always instrumental in getting budgets passed and drafting laws to ensure the rights of citizens. He is a big proponent of citizen rights.

Conversely, George "Da Decider" Bush has never seen a right that he did not attempt to trample over and we all know that he can not spell diplomacy. Under the "Decider's" watch, the USA has been reduced to being "Hazzard County." Cheney acts like "Boss Hogg" and "Da Decider" looks and acts like "Sheriff Roscoe P. Coltrane." This is how we look to the rest of the World, but for some reason you guys are acting like Obama will not improve our current standing in the World. I guess you guys must "misremember" a lot of stuff.

Post of the day!!!!

The Bush administration has been the most corrupt, inept, secretive and incompetent administration ever. The worst of the worst.....and it'll take a Democrat in the White House to fix all the aberrations left by our "brilliant" President. McCain won't stand a chance vs Hillary or Obama. Not even folks in his own party like him.

Not true at all, your ratings will go down the tubes after 7 years of getting slammed by the Liberal media day after day after day. People will soon get tired

"If you tell a lie a thousand times, it soon becomes the truth" -Joseph Gerbels- Nazy Minister of propaganda.

I can think of half a dozen presidents that were far worst than President Bush. Here is the list.

Some of the worst presidents of the second half of the 20th century.

1)Jimmy Carter. The peanut farmer was clueless when it came to national security and dealing with Muslim terrorists.

2)Lyndon Johnson. This guy had good intentions but like any Liberal idea while good in theory does not translate to real life. He helped to sistematically destroy the inner city family with welfare on demand policies and basically replaced the human father with the state father.

3) Sleek Willy Clinton. Need I say more?

First off, what is a Nazy?

Secondly, do you honestly think that there is anything worse than SENDING US TO WAR WITH THE WRONG COUNTRY??? I think Johnson was up there until Bush took the crown. Johnson kept us in a war where JFK was trying to get us out. But Bush has made mistake after mistake. Did you realize that before 9/11, Bush spent more time on vacation that any other President in American History? Bush has basically pissed on the constitution time and time again. What did Clinton piss on? Monica Lewinski? Not only is Bush one of the worst Presidents in the history of the United States, he is one of the dumbest. Every year it seems to be something even worse. Whether its sitting in front of kids reading books while the WTC is being bombed or naming unqualified people to the highest offices (Miers-Supreme Court, Brownie-FEMA), etc. and he still thinks that history will look favorably on him in 10 years. What has he EVER done on his own that hasn't blown up in his face? What accolades has he received? Carter has at least won the Nobel Peace Prize, Regan introduced "Reganomics" and ended the Cold War, Bush Sr. stopped Hussein from taking over the Middle East after he entered Kuwait. I'm not going to get into it, but every President has at least done something positive. Bush hasn't done squat. I thought he was off to a good start when he put very smart and competent people in his cabinet and in leadership roles, but all of them were gone within 4 years. You know, I never thought that there would be anyone dumber than Dan Quayle in the Presidency or VP, but Bush blows him out of the water...

You don't know what Nazy means??!! Here is a link. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi

You are more gullible than I thought. You really buy into the New York Slimes propaganda don't you?? It's Bush's fault that we got our buildings bombed?? But not SLEEK WILLY for not doing a damn thing about it??! in 8 years when he had the chance to take Bin Laden out!!?

PirateMarv Wrote:

Benjiminer Wrote:

UTEPDallas Wrote:

PirateMarv Wrote:

OptimisticOwl Wrote:

At Ease Wrote:Yeah, Obama seems a real pushover, given his unimpressive oratory skills and his promise to unilaterally send troops into Pakistan if any opportunity arises to wipe out Al Qaeda bases.

First, the idea of diplomacy is not to make speeches. It is to persuade the leader(s) of other countries to take actions they may not want to make. Oratory skills diminish in importance as the size of the audience diminishes and the political power of the individuals therein increases. His oratorical skills will be of much less use sitting across the table from a world leader than in front of a crowd of swooning schoolgirls. Just think, if only we had had a good speechifier, we could have avoided the Cold War, the Viet Nam war, 9-11, all those bad things.

Here is a quote from David Ignatius, whose area of expertise is foreign policy: "I fear that Mr. Obama is creating public expectations for a quick solution in Iraq that cannot responsibly be achieved".

This goes to my question of what happens when he disappoints. Remember, his strength is the 18-24 crowd, the skateboard and iPod gang with an attention span of 12 minutes. They get enthused really easily, lose interest just as quickly.

Since you have the link to the Obama blueprint for change, publish it here. Maybe a major media outlet will find it. That dadgum biased press cannot seem to find any substance, and they are FOR him.

I want to know:
1. WHAT is he going to change
2. FROM what
3. To what
4. Why
5. How

All Ronald Reagan ever did was make speeches. That is why Reagan got elected. He was a good communicator. John F. Kennedy got elected for the same reason. Ditto for Bill Clinton.

As far as the diplomacy goes, where did you get the impression that Barack Obama was unable to form coalitions to get things done? He was my State Senator in Illinois for a number years and he was always instrumental in getting budgets passed and drafting laws to ensure the rights of citizens. He is a big proponent of citizen rights.

Conversely, George "Da Decider" Bush has never seen a right that he did not attempt to trample over and we all know that he can not spell diplomacy. Under the "Decider's" watch, the USA has been reduced to being "Hazzard County." Cheney acts like "Boss Hogg" and "Da Decider" looks and acts like "Sheriff Roscoe P. Coltrane." This is how we look to the rest of the World, but for some reason you guys are acting like Obama will not improve our current standing in the World. I guess you guys must "misremember" a lot of stuff.

Post of the day!!!!

The Bush administration has been the most corrupt, inept, secretive and incompetent administration ever. The worst of the worst.....and it'll take a Democrat in the White House to fix all the aberrations left by our "brilliant" President. McCain won't stand a chance vs Hillary or Obama. Not even folks in his own party like him.

Not true at all, your ratings will go down the tubes after 7 years of getting slammed by the Liberal media day after day after day. People will soon get tired

"If you tell a lie a thousand times, it soon becomes the truth" -Joseph Gerbels- Nazy Minister of propaganda.

So do any of these ring a bell:

"They have weapons of mass destruction."

We, the UN, Britain, HIS OWN GENERALS believed that he most likely did as he kept jerking around the international atomic commission for years.


"They will meet us in the streets as liberators."

They did, did you not see the 1st Marine Division being welcomed and flowers being thrown at them??! Or did you conveniently forgot?

"I am an ex-alcholic."

No comment.

PirateMarv Wrote:

TheGimp Wrote:

Benjiminer Wrote:

UTEPDallas Wrote:

PirateMarv Wrote:

OptimisticOwl Wrote:

At Ease Wrote:Yeah, Obama seems a real pushover, given his unimpressive oratory skills and his promise to unilaterally send troops into Pakistan if any opportunity arises to wipe out Al Qaeda bases.

First, the idea of diplomacy is not to make speeches. It is to persuade the leader(s) of other countries to take actions they may not want to make. Oratory skills diminish in importance as the size of the audience diminishes and the political power of the individuals therein increases. His oratorical skills will be of much less use sitting across the table from a world leader than in front of a crowd of swooning schoolgirls. Just think, if only we had had a good speechifier, we could have avoided the Cold War, the Viet Nam war, 9-11, all those bad things.

Here is a quote from David Ignatius, whose area of expertise is foreign policy: "I fear that Mr. Obama is creating public expectations for a quick solution in Iraq that cannot responsibly be achieved".

This goes to my question of what happens when he disappoints. Remember, his strength is the 18-24 crowd, the skateboard and iPod gang with an attention span of 12 minutes. They get enthused really easily, lose interest just as quickly.

Since you have the link to the Obama blueprint for change, publish it here. Maybe a major media outlet will find it. That dadgum biased press cannot seem to find any substance, and they are FOR him.

I want to know:
1. WHAT is he going to change
2. FROM what
3. To what
4. Why
5. How

All Ronald Reagan ever did was make speeches. That is why Reagan got elected. He was a good communicator. John F. Kennedy got elected for the same reason. Ditto for Bill Clinton.

As far as the diplomacy goes, where did you get the impression that Barack Obama was unable to form coalitions to get things done? He was my State Senator in Illinois for a number years and he was always instrumental in getting budgets passed and drafting laws to ensure the rights of citizens. He is a big proponent of citizen rights.

Conversely, George "Da Decider" Bush has never seen a right that he did not attempt to trample over and we all know that he can not spell diplomacy. Under the "Decider's" watch, the USA has been reduced to being "Hazzard County." Cheney acts like "Boss Hogg" and "Da Decider" looks and acts like "Sheriff Roscoe P. Coltrane." This is how we look to the rest of the World, but for some reason you guys are acting like Obama will not improve our current standing in the World. I guess you guys must "misremember" a lot of stuff.

Post of the day!!!!

The Bush administration has been the most corrupt, inept, secretive and incompetent administration ever. The worst of the worst.....and it'll take a Democrat in the White House to fix all the aberrations left by our "brilliant" President. McCain won't stand a chance vs Hillary or Obama. Not even folks in his own party like him.

Not true at all, your ratings will go down the tubes after 7 years of getting slammed by the Liberal media day after day after day. People will soon get tired

"If you tell a lie a thousand times, it soon becomes the truth" -Joseph Gerbels- Nazy Minister of propaganda.

I can think of half a dozen presidents that were far worst than President Bush. Here is the list.

Some of the worst presidents of the second half of the 20th century.

1)Jimmy Carter. The peanut farmer was clueless when it came to national security and dealing with Muslim terrorists.

2)Lyndon Johnson. This guy had good intentions but like any Liberal idea while good in theory does not translate to real life. He helped to sistematically destroy the inner city family with welfare on demand policies and basically replaced the human father with the state father.

3) Sleek Willy Clinton. Need I say more?

First off, what is a Nazy?

Secondly, do you honestly think that there is anything worse than SENDING US TO WAR WITH THE WRONG COUNTRY??? I think Johnson was up there until Bush took the crown. Johnson kept us in a war where JFK was trying to get us out. But Bush has made mistake after mistake. Did you realize that before 9/11, Bush spent more time on vacation that any other President in American History? Bush has basically pissed on the constitution time and time again. What did Clinton piss on? Monica Lewinski? Not only is Bush one of the worst Presidents in the history of the United States, he is one of the dumbest. Every year it seems to be something even worse. Whether its sitting in front of kids reading books while the WTC is being bombed or naming unqualified people to the highest offices (Miers-Supreme Court, Brownie-FEMA), etc. and he still thinks that history will look favorably on him in 10 years. What has he EVER done on his own that hasn't blown up in his face? What accolades has he received? Carter has at least won the Nobel Peace Prize, Regan introduced "Reganomics" and ended the Cold War, Bush Sr. stopped Hussein from taking over the Middle East after he entered Kuwait. I'm not going to get into it, but every President has at least done something positive. Bush hasn't done squat. I thought he was off to a good start when he put very smart and competent people in his cabinet and in leadership roles, but all of them were gone within 4 years. You know, I never thought that there would be anyone dumber than Dan Quayle in the Presidency or VP, but Bush blows him out of the water...

Gimp,

I agree with eveything you wrote and I will add a little more. Regardless of a party that a President belongs too, he is usally able to garner at least a modicum of respect from the other party. As a Democrat I can state that Nixon was very bright, but extremely paranoid. I can state that Reagan was a good speaker that could motivate people. Ford was a calming influence, but he was thrust into a horrible situation. Bush, Sr., was cynical and snippy, but he was at least smart enough to listen to his advisors and not invade Baghdad during the first Gulf War.

Hardly anyone, including serious thinking Republicans, consider Bush a good president. In fact there is a general consensus amongst almost everyone, except the most delusional Republicans (The Rush Limbaugh, Fox Noise crowd, et al), that Bush Jr., is perhaps the worst President of all time, or at the minimum at least in recent memory.

Jimmy Carter was a micro-manager, but every Republican with any sense, will acknowledge that Carter was light years ahead of Bush, Jr. It is not even close. Bush Jr.'s approval rating is at the lowest level of any sitting President. The man's approval rating shows that over 70% of the Country does not approve of his work. So there are clearly a lot of Republicans that agree with the Democrats, in believing that Bush Jr., is a very bad President.

Any Democrat with any sense knows that if you are getting hit by the Liberal establishment day in and day out for 7 years with nothing but negative news even Jesus Christ will have a low approval rating.

"If you tell a lie a thousand times it soon becomes the truth" -Josephg Gerbels - Nazy Propaganda Minister.

A big part of Bush's low approval rating is because of many conservatives dissapointment in him in dealing with the border and other conservative issues.

Benjiminer Wrote:

TheGimp Wrote:

Benjiminer Wrote:

UTEPDallas Wrote:

PirateMarv Wrote:

OptimisticOwl Wrote:

At Ease Wrote:Yeah, Obama seems a real pushover, given his unimpressive oratory skills and his promise to unilaterally send troops into Pakistan if any opportunity arises to wipe out Al Qaeda bases.

First, the idea of diplomacy is not to make speeches. It is to persuade the leader(s) of other countries to take actions they may not want to make. Oratory skills diminish in importance as the size of the audience diminishes and the political power of the individuals therein increases. His oratorical skills will be of much less use sitting across the table from a world leader than in front of a crowd of swooning schoolgirls. Just think, if only we had had a good speechifier, we could have avoided the Cold War, the Viet Nam war, 9-11, all those bad things.

Here is a quote from David Ignatius, whose area of expertise is foreign policy: "I fear that Mr. Obama is creating public expectations for a quick solution in Iraq that cannot responsibly be achieved".

This goes to my question of what happens when he disappoints. Remember, his strength is the 18-24 crowd, the skateboard and iPod gang with an attention span of 12 minutes. They get enthused really easily, lose interest just as quickly.

Since you have the link to the Obama blueprint for change, publish it here. Maybe a major media outlet will find it. That dadgum biased press cannot seem to find any substance, and they are FOR him.

I want to know:
1. WHAT is he going to change
2. FROM what
3. To what
4. Why
5. How

All Ronald Reagan ever did was make speeches. That is why Reagan got elected. He was a good communicator. John F. Kennedy got elected for the same reason. Ditto for Bill Clinton.

As far as the diplomacy goes, where did you get the impression that Barack Obama was unable to form coalitions to get things done? He was my State Senator in Illinois for a number years and he was always instrumental in getting budgets passed and drafting laws to ensure the rights of citizens. He is a big proponent of citizen rights.

Conversely, George "Da Decider" Bush has never seen a right that he did not attempt to trample over and we all know that he can not spell diplomacy. Under the "Decider's" watch, the USA has been reduced to being "Hazzard County." Cheney acts like "Boss Hogg" and "Da Decider" looks and acts like "Sheriff Roscoe P. Coltrane." This is how we look to the rest of the World, but for some reason you guys are acting like Obama will not improve our current standing in the World. I guess you guys must "misremember" a lot of stuff.

Post of the day!!!!

The Bush administration has been the most corrupt, inept, secretive and incompetent administration ever. The worst of the worst.....and it'll take a Democrat in the White House to fix all the aberrations left by our "brilliant" President. McCain won't stand a chance vs Hillary or Obama. Not even folks in his own party like him.

Not true at all, your ratings will go down the tubes after 7 years of getting slammed by the Liberal media day after day after day. People will soon get tired

"If you tell a lie a thousand times, it soon becomes the truth" -Joseph Gerbels- Nazy Minister of propaganda.

I can think of half a dozen presidents that were far worst than President Bush. Here is the list.

Some of the worst presidents of the second half of the 20th century.

1)Jimmy Carter. The peanut farmer was clueless when it came to national security and dealing with Muslim terrorists.

2)Lyndon Johnson. This guy had good intentions but like any Liberal idea while good in theory does not translate to real life. He helped to sistematically destroy the inner city family with welfare on demand policies and basically replaced the human father with the state father.

3) Sleek Willy Clinton. Need I say more?

First off, what is a Nazy?

Secondly, do you honestly think that there is anything worse than SENDING US TO WAR WITH THE WRONG COUNTRY??? I think Johnson was up there until Bush took the crown. Johnson kept us in a war where JFK was trying to get us out. But Bush has made mistake after mistake. Did you realize that before 9/11, Bush spent more time on vacation that any other President in American History? Bush has basically pissed on the constitution time and time again. What did Clinton piss on? Monica Lewinski? Not only is Bush one of the worst Presidents in the history of the United States, he is one of the dumbest. Every year it seems to be something even worse. Whether its sitting in front of kids reading books while the WTC is being bombed or naming unqualified people to the highest offices (Miers-Supreme Court, Brownie-FEMA), etc. and he still thinks that history will look favorably on him in 10 years. What has he EVER done on his own that hasn't blown up in his face? What accolades has he received? Carter has at least won the Nobel Peace Prize, Regan introduced "Reganomics" and ended the Cold War, Bush Sr. stopped Hussein from taking over the Middle East after he entered Kuwait. I'm not going to get into it, but every President has at least done something positive. Bush hasn't done squat. I thought he was off to a good start when he put very smart and competent people in his cabinet and in leadership roles, but all of them were gone within 4 years. You know, I never thought that there would be anyone dumber than Dan Quayle in the Presidency or VP, but Bush blows him out of the water...

You don't know what Nazy means??!! Here is a link. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi

You are more gullible than I thought. You really buy into the New York Slimes propaganda don't you?? It's Bush's fault that we got our buildings bombed?? But not SLEEK WILLY for not doing a damn thing about it??! in 8 years when he had the chance to take Bin Laden out!!?

Gullible? Because I was giving you crap because you misspelled a 4-letter word? What is ironic is that you did it again and then post the link which actually has it spelled right. Humorous...

I never said it was Bush's fault, but after it happens he didn't do anything! My job is nowhere near presiding over a nation, but if a plane flew into my building, either where I work or live, I'm outta there as fast as possible to see what I can do to help. A few years ago, my girlfriend called me saying she was in a car accident and I RAN out of the office and sped to get to where she was. Did I have anything to do with the accident? No. But I will try to help anyway possible. I wouldn't sit there trying not to freak out kids during the worst tragedy of this generation.

That being said, I agree with you that Clinton should have done something about Bin Laden, but the fact of the matter is - Bush knew about 9/11 WEEKS before the attack and afterwards, HE DID NOTHING! We are debating what Bush has done. Since when do two wrongs make a right? At least Clinton DID SOMETHING during his Presidency. What has Bush done? Call me ignorant, but I can't think of something positive Bush has done for this country. NOT ONE!

FYI, I have NEVER read the New York Times. Why is it that if someone doesn't agree with something Bush does, they must be listening to the biased media? I don't know about you, but I can actually think for myself. Why can't you? You can start by asking yourself one question - Is your life and that of your family, friends, those that you care about BETTER now than it was when BUSH took office? Since Bush took office, I've had to deal with fear tactics, gas prices over $3 a gallon and $100 a barrel, a deficit that went from a surplus to over $3 Trillion, more taxes for the lower and middle class while the upper class (10%) have been able to walk between the raindrops, seeing Bush nominate candidates for positions as important as the Supreme Court and Director of FEMA (which, ironically enough Bush was told about the levees DAYS before Katrina hit and nothing was done as far as being prepared to go in there after the hurricane passed) that are more than underqualified (and this happened time and time again), leaving the country and seeing the negative impact the Bush Presidency has had on the world not only in general, but in the world's perception of Americans, etc.

What does make me nervous, however, is that you are slamming Americans (whether they agree with you or not) and quoting Nazis...

Oh, and one last thing, why is it that it's ok for Bush to be a bad president if others were bad too?

This thread need to be moved!!

At Ease Wrote:If nobody knows what Obama stands for, then who put together the website under his name where it details how he stands on, and would produce change for, any of a number of issues?

Stump speeches that are more style and inspiration than substance. How damning. I didn't realize there were so many people fond of a detail-oriented Al Gore-like campaign approach....

NARRATOR: And while this thread's usefulness essentially ended with this rational point, it continued on with the usual partisan bickering...

PirateMarv Wrote:

RebelKev Wrote:

PirateMarv Wrote:BTW, Clinton was in the National Guard, just like Bush. Cheney never served. All three are draft dodgers.

Clinton was NOT in the National Guard. As for Bush and Cheney, neither are draft-dodgers. Why? You can't dodge the f'n draft when you're in the NG nor can you when you get a deferment. You don't get a draft



.....and like I said, you don't know **** about the military.
(

You asked me if I served. I told you that I did and then you called me a liar. In case you didn't know it, Democrats serve in the military too. BTW, I also come from a military family, stretching back as far as the Civil War. My family has represented all four branches of the military (really only three, because you "jarheads" belong to the Secretary of the Navy or at least you used to). Anyway, I did basic training and my A school in Great Lakes. I did my 8404 field training at Camp Johnson on Camp LeJeune. I then hung out with you jarheads for few years, before enrolling at ECU. I enjoyed my time in the service and for that matter at ECU.

That's pretty low, even for poor Kevin--doubting and denying a man's own military service. Not the least bit surprising, unfortunately.

It goes without noting, PirateMarv, that the subject was abruptly changed from examining candidates' military service (in terms of commanding the military) to your own personal service career. Kev's pretty bad about this when stepping from mere board moderator to political expert.

At Ease Wrote:

OptimisticOwl Wrote:

At Ease Wrote:Yeah, Obama seems a real pushover, given his unimpressive oratory skills and his promise to unilaterally send troops into Pakistan if any opportunity arises to wipe out Al Qaeda bases.

First, the idea of diplomacy is not to make speeches. It is to persuade the leader(s) of other countries to take actions they may not want to make. Oratory skills diminish in importance as the size of the audience diminishes and the political power of the individuals therein increases. His oratorical skills will be of much less use sitting across the table from a world leader than in front of a crowd of swooning schoolgirls. Just think, if only we had had a good speechifier, we could have avoided the Cold War, the Viet Nam war, 9-11, all those bad things.

Speeches are actually pretty important in generating support and good will, home and abroad, which puts pressure on people of power... but I digress, as clearly they're the not the only element of diplomacy. The point was that to convey my view that BO's eloquence renders him an imposing figure who has already indicated he will be tenacious when it comes to defending America's interests. Accordingly, your mock exchange, portraying him as spineless, strikes me as ridiculous.

BTW, very logical to suppose that because speeches weren't able to prevent the Cold War, Vietnam, or 9-11, that they have no role in diplomacy.

OptimisticOwl Wrote:Here is a quote from David Ignatius, whose area of expertise is foreign policy: "I fear that Mr. Obama is creating public expectations for a quick solution in Iraq that cannot responsibly be achieved".

This goes to my question of what happens when he disappoints. Remember, his strength is the 18-24 crowd, the skateboard and iPod gang with an attention span of 12 minutes. They get enthused really easily, lose interest just as quickly.

Since you have the link to the Obama blueprint for change, publish it here. Maybe a major media outlet will find it. That dadgum biased press cannot seem to find any substance, and they are FOR him.

I want to know:
1. WHAT is he going to change
2. FROM what
3. To what
4. Why
5. How

Sure, let's for a second kid ourselves that it matters and that you genuinely don't know what Obama stands for.

The website is:
http://www.barackobama.com

You can find a litany of issues, what he sees as the problem, and what his solutions detail. The website provides brief synopses. PDF's are available if you want further minutiae. He'll also be at Reunion tomorrow morning if you want to stop by and ask him yourself.

He does nor provide details to his solutions. He claims he will overturn a Suprem Court decison. How?

youngalum Wrote:Deferments were for the pu$$ies of the world. Anyone who had college could apply and get a deferment. A LOT of Liberals fall in this category. It wasn't hard to obtain and to equate it to real service is total BS. It was the pu$$y way out for those who did not want to truly wanted to serve and not get drafted.

I find it no surprise that the majority of a Southern Fball message board is against a Democrat, let alone a black male Democrat. A racist finally appears to inject racism were it does not exist. [b]BTW to our Racist, Condi has great support by Republicans[/b]. It goes to the insecurity of the person to admit a black man has more influence and power than a white male in the South. It is ingrained and part of the culture. Hate to admit it, but I as a Southern white male can see through the smoke screen of the posters who are against Obama.

You guys might as well go ahead and bring up his middle name and the BS on his schools and his family. Might as well make the trifecta of BS to make it complete.

Call a spade a spade. If the Republican nominee had horns and a tail most of you would vote for that devil over a Democrat any day regardless of the devilatry of the candidate. For the most part, a black candidate makes your life insecure and it makes one sick with envy that that person is more successful than you could ever be. This is hard for a Southern male over the age of 30 to admit, but it is so true and sad.

I can't believe it took this long for a racist to make this comment!

youngalum Wrote:Deferments were for the pu$$ies of the world. Anyone who had college could apply and get a deferment[.b] A LOT of Liberals fall in this category.[/b] It wasn't hard to obtain and to equate it to real service is total BS. It was the pu$$y way out for those who did not want to truly wanted to serve and not get drafted.

I find it no surprise that the majority of a Southern Fball message board is against a Democrat, let alone a black male Democrat. [b]A racist finally appears to inject racism were it does not exist. [b][b]BTW to our Racist friend, Condi has great support by Republicans['/b]. It goes to the insecurity of the person to admit a black man has more influence and power than a white male in the South. It is ingrained and part of the culture. Hate to admit it, but I as a Southern white male can see through the smoke screen of the posters who are against Obama.

You guys might as well go ahead and bring up his middle name and the BS on his schools and his family. Might as well make the trifecta of BS to make it complete.

Call a spade a spade. If the Republican nominee had horns and a tail most of you would vote for that devil over a Democrat any day regardless of the devilatry of the candidate. For the most part, a black candidate makes your life insecure and it makes one sick with envy that that person is more successful than you could ever be. This is hard for a Southern male over the age of 30 to admit, but it is so true and sad.