Is President Obama failing the test of leadership?

[erco415]

From the Mort Zuckerman article (full text here (http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-01-19/hes-done-everything-wrong/)):

He’s improved America’s image in the world. He absolutely did. But you have to translate that into something. Let me tell you what a major leader said to me recently. “We are convinced,” he said, “that he is not strong enough to confront his enemy. We are concerned,” he said “that he is not strong to support his friends.”

The question isn't if the President has passed legislation, or advanced his agenda. It's whether or not he's displayed good leadership.

I don't think he is.

What say you?

[erco415]

From the Mort Zuckerman article (full text here (http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-01-19/hes-done-everything-wrong/)):

He’s improved America’s image in the world. He absolutely did. But you have to translate that into something. Let me tell you what a major leader said to me recently. “We are convinced,” he said, “that he is not strong enough to confront his enemy. We are concerned,” he said “that he is not strong to support his friends.”

The question isn't if the President has passed legislation, or advanced his agenda. It's whether or not he's displayed good leadership.

I don't think he is.

What say you?

[FlatSpinMan]

I think he has.
What say you?

[Rjel]

"One business leader said to me..."

"Let me tell you what a major leader said to me recently..."

I love that type of reporting. It adds so much weight to the story. I'm tired of unnamed sources in news reports. If people have ideas and opinions that they feel are valid, say so publicly instead of sniping from the shadows.

[JG52Uther]

From an outsiders viewpoint:
Just by getting elected,he gave the world a bit of hope that things could improve.
Its a shame that so many Americans seem to want to go back to the Bush era,which really,wasn't a great success for the world.

[x6BL_Brando]

Poverty, ill-health and low standards of education are as much the "enemy" of civilisation as rogue states, terrorism and nuclear proliferation. Too great a focus on the latter is at the expense of the former, but a better scenario for financiers, arms-dealers and right-wing politicians who seek to excuse their deeds by demonizing whoever they can.

It is the hope that President Obama may do something to redress the balance of American foreign policy that inspires hope amongst us folks abroad. Whether his iniatives will survive conservative intransigence and the rabble-rousing tactics of the Tea Party crowd remains to be seen.

The true test here is surely not so much of the President's abilities as a leader, but of the American peoples' integrity in supporting a democratically-elected government. It doesn't augur well at the moment.

B

[Ba5tard5word]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Let me tell you what a major leader said to me recently. “We are convinced,” he said, “that he is not strong enough to confront his enemy." </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Did you see him lecturing the GOP last Friday? He wiped the floor with them!

Ok I'll get my hat... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

[stalkervision]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ba5tard5word:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Let me tell you what a major leader said to me recently. “We are convinced,” he said, “that he is not strong enough to confront his enemy." </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Did you see him lecturing the GOP last Friday? He wiped the floor with them!

Ok I'll get my hat... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

ya, I totally agree. From what I saw he sure did.

[Rjel]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stalkervision:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ba5tard5word:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Let me tell you what a major leader said to me recently. “We are convinced,” he said, “that he is not strong enough to confront his enemy." </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Did you see him lecturing the GOP last Friday? He wiped the floor with them!

Ok I'll get my hat... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

ya, I totally agree. From what I saw he sure did. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I thought he got hammered a couple of times. It looked like it got pretty heated. This country needs more real interaction between the parties. A lot more if we are to get back on track and I think it needs to be done in public view as often as possible.

[horseback]

Is President Obama failing the test of leadership?

What is ‘leadership’?

Is it defining a vision, convincing the greater majority to share that vision, and then finding people to help you take practical steps to accomplish your goals?

If that is the case, the man has not lived up to his much hyped promise. He has been vague when he should have been specific, specific when he should have been silent, defiant when he should have been conciliatory, and kissed @ss when he should have been kicking it.

With big majorities in the House and Senate, the full support of most of the mainstream media and the goodwill of the overwhelming majority of the American people and the world, Mr. Obama should have gotten everything he asked for by the end of his first year in office. That he has not cannot be blamed solely on Fox News and the evil Republicans saying ‘no’. He has not provided adult supervision for the tin eared Democratic leaders of the House and Senate; he has never extended his hand across the aisle or made any real attempt to examine the arguments of the other side and try to find a middle ground to base reasonable compromise on.

He and members of his administration have been caught in lie after lie and made gaffe after gaffe—and it’s not just the depth of his bows to foreign rulers; the President’s and the Attorney General’s public declarations about the guilt and expected verdict for the Twin Towers’ alleged mastermind after announcing that he would be tried in a criminal court, thereby contaminating the national jury pool, are just the tip of that iceberg.

Mr. Obama reminds me of a commercial a few years back where a man in a lab coat announces that “I’m not really a doctor, I just play one on TV.” The man looks like someone trying to play a role in a TV show, doing the personal appearances and doing interviews (more than one speech a day since his inauguration, according to most sources I’ve heard) that a not too bright teenager would imagine constitute being president instead of actually doing the work that the office requires. A teleprompter and a podium for a visit to an elementary school classroom?—Please.

The man is all surface, and the Republicans have done their civic duty by revealing him and arguing every point—and they have forced many Democrats who want to be reelected to reconsider their stances on a number of key issues, particularly those ‘Blue Dog’ Dems who got into office by appearing more conservative than the RINOs (Republicans In Name Only) they replaced in the last two elections.

For our European friends, all I can tell you is that we don’t—and damned well shouldn’t—elect our presidents to please the rest of the world. Our leaders are supposed to do what is best for us and are judged accordingly. I should also point out that your media are at least as prejudiced as ours is, and quite selective about the ‘facts’ they provide you. I assure you, you have nothing like the whole picture.

cheers

horseback

[Bremspropeller]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">or our European friends, all I can tell you is that we don’t—and damned well shouldn’t—elect our presidents to please the rest of the world. Our leaders are supposed to do what is best for us and are judged accordingly. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Funny, as there's a link between the two http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

[Ba5tard5word]

As usual invading Iraq for no reason, shredding the Constitution and shooting an old man in the face are more excusable than being competent while not being a Republican.

I'm not sure why conservatives are so obsessed with the US appearing "weak" in the world when they have done so much to destroy our standing in the world, capitulated to terror by eroding the freedoms the terrorists supposedly hate so much, and undermined our economy with a pointless and costly war and zero regulation of the Wall Street casino.

[HayateAce]

16 0bama lies in 7 minutes...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xyodr8evUcg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_SZc9hEspn3c/SdlU9UPy90I/AAAAAAAAAtQ/n8OdFJX9y0w/s400/ObamaIncompetance.jpg

[Cajun76]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ba5tard5word:
As usual invading Iraq for no reason, shredding the Constitution and shooting an old man in the face are more excusable than being competent while not being a Republican.

I'm not sure why conservatives are so obsessed with the US appearing "weak" in the world when they have done so much to destroy our standing in the world, capitulated to terror by eroding the freedoms the terrorists supposedly hate so much, and undermined our economy with a pointless and costly war and zero regulation of the Wall Street casino. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And a classic example of responding to points with attacks.

But I'll bite nonetheless:

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">invading Iraq for no reason</span>

I can think of several reasons. You cannot. Please explain how Iraq could be invaded (with Democrat's votes) for no reason.

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">shredding the Constitution</span>

Please show a supposed example that hasn't been approved by Democrats as well or continued by the current administration.

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">shooting an old man in the face</span>

In the same vein, impregnating your mistress while your cancer-stricken wife struggles on and asking your aide to take the fall while paying said mistress with campaign money while working for the "poor" is the best view underneath the thin veneer of a Democrat.


The rest is Kieth Olbermann brand Kool Aid: a half full cup of bitter misinformation.

[Bremspropeller]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I can think of several reasons </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

RLY?
Real ones? Or just the usual BS? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

[TinyTim]

Is President Obama failing the test of leadership?

In my humble opinion, no, he's not failing it.

Representative for public relations never actually needs to pass one, he only needs to be careful when informing the public about the decisions his superiors have taken.

[Gammelpreusse]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by erco415:
From the Mort Zuckerman article (full text here (http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-01-19/hes-done-everything-wrong/)):

He’s improved America’s image in the world. He absolutely did. But you have to translate that into something. Let me tell you what a major leader said to me recently. “We are convinced,” he said, “that he is not strong enough to confront his enemy. We are concerned,” he said “that he is not strong to support his friends.”

The question isn't if the President has passed legislation, or advanced his agenda. It's whether or not he's displayed good leadership.

I don't think he is.

What say you? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Certainly he is too weak. What do you expect? Half his country wages open war against him, for reasons like frikkin dijon on a burger, if that does not undermine any leaders position what else does? After all other nations are monitoring very closely what is happening within the US, this forum is living proof of that.

It's funny that reps complain about a weak president whose position they are directly responsible for.

btw, what is "the enemy"?

[stalkervision]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Rjel:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stalkervision:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ba5tard5word:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Let me tell you what a major leader said to me recently. “We are convinced,” he said, “that he is not strong enough to confront his enemy." </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Did you see him lecturing the GOP last Friday? He wiped the floor with them!

Ok I'll get my hat... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

ya, I totally agree. From what I saw he sure did. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I thought he got hammered a couple of times. It looked like it got pretty heated. This country needs more real interaction between the parties. A lot more if we are to get back on track and I think it needs to be done in public view as often as possible. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not from what I saw."Hammered ?" I highly doubt it from what I observed. It looked like the absolute other way around with obama holding the club. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

[stalkervision]

Is obama to weak? Ask yourself WHY first. I don't see his side or the other side helping him out a whole lot with anything whatsoever.

[Ba5tard5word]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">invading Iraq for no reason

I can think of several reasons. You cannot. Please explain how Iraq could be invaded (with Democrat's votes) for no reason.

shredding the Constitution

Please show a supposed example that hasn't been approved by Democrats as well or continued by the current administration. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Ah yes the old "how dare the other side help us out because they were fooled by the lies told by my side which was completely in charge of intelligence gathering and foreign policy at the time, also pay no attention to the fact that many Democrats spoke out against the war effort and shredding of the Constitution and were immediately lambasted as traitors who hated America by my side, and also this post is in no way a repudiation of the war effort despite the fact that it is" line of talking points that have become faddish among neocons in the last few years.

And I threw in the Cheney thing just for fun, but it is funny that conservatives didn't care about that (or the other 10,000 other objectively bad things Bush/Cheney actively chose to do) but cry bloody murder over Obama putting dijon on his hamburger or not torturing people.

[horseback]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">As usual invading Iraq for no reason, shredding the Constitution and shooting an old man in the face are more excusable than being competent while not being a Republican. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>We invaded Iraq with the consent of the Democratic majority in the Senate at that time (you may remember Jim Jeffords leaving the GOP shortly after the election in 2000 to give the Dems a majority there). As you may recall, it had at least as much to do with the Clinton Administration’s saber rattling in ’98-’99 as it did with GW’s animosity towards the late lamented Saddam Hussein. I assume the ‘shredding the Constitution’ refers to the usual stuff, none of which could have passed through the legislative branch or its oversight committees without support of a number of Dems in both the Senate—again, with a Democratic majority—and House during the first two years of the Bush II administration.

‘Shooting an old man in the face?’ I’m sorry, I have no recollection of the Bush Administration or any elected Republican shooting any old men except for Vice President Cheney’s hunting mishap, and that was purely unintentional (and far too funny for you to be angry about).
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">In response to:
for our European friends, all I can tell you is that we don’t—and damned well shouldn’t—elect our presidents to please the rest of the world. Our leaders are supposed to do what is best for us and are judged accordingly.

Bremspropellor wrote:

Funny, as there's a link between the two. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I agree that there is a link; I would generally disagree with you about what that link is, or what it means. I’ve found that in my lifetime, that when the world is pleased with us and our leaders, we’re betraying our ideals and damaging our own economic and military strengths and options. The only times you guys have admitted to liking us is when we're doing what is in your short term convenience and when you need us to save your bacon.

I remember Jimmy Carter’s administration all too well, and how happy he made the outside world (especially the Soviet Union-except for that Moscow Olympics boycott thingie). I view this administration as being even worse in every meaningful way.

cheers

horseback

[Pirschjaeger]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Uther:
From an outsiders viewpoint:
Just by getting elected,he gave the world a bit of hope that things could improve.
Its a shame that so many Americans seem to want to go back to the Bush era,which really,wasn't a great success for the world. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Perhaps they were expecting a quick fix?

It seems that way to me. I cannot say whether he's a good leader or not. It's way to early and unless he's really terrible, we won't know for years. Look at Bush. He was hardly ever a good leader and he got elected twice.

I think the Bush days might be missed because during the Bush days the BS was heavy but at least tasteful to the masses.

Obama came in unfairly expected to change the world in a year and already people are missing their 'all you can eat' BS. Bush's success, in my opinion, was his constant blowing sunshine up America's bum-hole. It seems people don't realise Obama isn't responsible for the current problems.

[LEBillfish]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The man is all surface, and the Republicans have done their civic duty by revealing him and arguing every point—and they have forced many Democrats who want to be reelected to reconsider their stances on a number of key issues, particularly those ‘Blue Dog’ Dems who got into office by appearing more conservative than the RINOs (Republicans In Name Only) they replaced in the last two elections </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Nope....He has not failed at all. Nor has the balance of the government.

Who has failed is the American people....We have failed in the regard that we tolerate such petty BS by our SERVANTS! Those servants not doing what is right, what they are paid to do, what it is now their obligation to do....and that being to simply make the right decisions based upon the issue at hand......period.

It is absolutly rediculous that we are paying out trillions of dollars to a group of people who though there to serve us, live as though they "rule" over us and in higher style then most of those they serve......It is absolutly insane that we tolerate the absolutly pointless absurdity of "party politics" as though it is nothing more then some game, simply boys trying to out bluff the others, and all basically for self serving bragging rights while the very people that put them there, maintain them, clothe and feed them are talked down to...."Told" what they can and cannot do.....and it all nothing more then petty desperate little people trying to bluff power and clout from one another and worst of all their real masters......Us.

However there is a clear explination.......Many of the threads here simply laced with the above......Nothing to do with what is right or wrong. In fact, most simply spewing all wrong to press personal issues be it their own misguided party support (are you frigging kidding me?....they are there to support you and your wishes, not the other way around), to simply being poor sports, their choice/vote not made by the balance, to even worse still by many biggotry smacking of nothing more of low class trash racist rage.

Obama has done fine in the rediculous situation of the state of the nation when he started, the rediculousness of the above politics, and frankly all the suddenly open racism by many simply not taking him by his merits and accomplishments yet blindly opposing him and his efforts based on only the fact he wasn't your choice, or you're a lacky to the opposite party, or quite simply because he is not of your race......and due to any of those reasons or hundreds of others equally shallow and unfounded...will fight him tooth and nail till the day they die......Hell, he could find the cure for cancer, world peace, wealth and happiness for all and would still be fought on it.

Nope, he's done fine, the balance of the politicians the same........We as a nation of free people have failed in letting it go on.

Do and say what is right simply for right sake nothing more....No hidden personal agenda or reason.....Till then, any doing otherwise are simply supporting the worst of politics and of ourselves.

K2

[iroseland01]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pirschjaeger:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Uther:
From an outsiders viewpoint:
Just by getting elected,he gave the world a bit of hope that things could improve.
Its a shame that so many Americans seem to want to go back to the Bush era,which really,wasn't a great success for the world. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Perhaps they were expecting a quick fix?

It seems that way to me. I cannot say whether he's a good leader or not. It's way to early and unless he's really terrible, we won't know for years. Look at Bush. He was hardly ever a good leader and he got elected twice.

I think the Bush days might be missed because during the Bush days the BS was heavy but at least tasteful to the masses.

Obama came in unfairly expected to change the world in a year and already people are missing their 'all you can eat' BS. Bush's success, in my opinion, was his constant blowing sunshine up America's bum-hole. It seems people don't realise Obama isn't responsible for the current problems. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Unfairly? You don't run on HOPE and CHANGE and then expect to get away with doing neither. He would be in a far better position if he and his administration had done a few things differently. Like pay their taxes.. When regular citizens get in as much tax trouble as they do we end up with IRS locks on the front door of our house and us in jail. Then their was the joke stimulus bill that was more pork than stimulus and the joke healthcare bill that was more concerned with who would be paying the bill than actually getting the costs under control. All the while his cabinet members were shooting their mouths off about the desperate need for more gun control, wile watching out for right wing terrorists, instead of the ones who are actually attacking us. We might have all been left feeling better if they had spent their time overhauling their own ethics rules, repealing the uncomfortable parts of the patriot act and increasing government transparency and accountability.

Finally, the thing that the super coolaid drinking far left really needs to understand is just how bad the backlash that's coming is going to be and how they sunk their own boat.

1. We don't elevate someone up to demigod in this country for no reason. We do it because its really entertaining to watch them fall. This of course is the first time we will have done it with the president, but even the press is now sharpening their knives. When they turn on him to boost ratings it will be really ugly.
2. Heavy use of NLP during the election was bound to have a problem with sustainability. It has now started to wear thin and the result is going to be people who are not happy at all.


As for Bush, I don't think that many folks are really interested in going back to Bush.. Heck, we already have Bush III in office right now. What the people were looking for was someone who could get the economy moving again, and clean up the ethics mess in DC. Right now it does not look like we are getting either of those. The stimulus bill has so far mostly just succeeded in putting up signs on the road telling us how the money is getting spent there. As for ethics in DC, its buisness as usual with a new party cashing the lobbyist checks. If the prez and the folks in DC really want the support of the people they should be working on these two things. Until then they are just wasting everyone's time.

[Bremspropeller]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> I’ve found that in my lifetime, that when the world is pleased with us and our leaders, we’re betraying our ideals and damaging our own economic and military strengths and options. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

By that you're saying that your "ideals" are held high by capturing peple without any sentence, torture them and generally give a damn about your very own ideals of treating other humans.
That's basicly what made your country somewhat less popular in the outside-world dring the Bush II years.

Furthermore, you're stating that leading a war that was not backed by the UN, and that's basicly ruining your economy and military strength (or would you say the US military is at a historic peak of strength with all the troops committed to two wars?) is actualy providing comfort for both, military and economy.

Sounds very off to me, as it contradicts itself.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> I remember Jimmy Carter’s administration all too well, and how happy he made the outside world (especially the Soviet Union-except for that Moscow Olympics boycott thingie). I view this administration as being even worse in every meaningful way. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Did you ever wonder why some islamic-fundamentalist hates you/ your country so much?
The reasons pretty much vary with each individual, but there's a core of reasons...

It's not "your" freedom or our values or because they wanna expand http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

It's because the very same attitude you're showing here - not giving a rat's *** about anything outside your country, while your country has influence all accross the world.
And there is a lot of influence of your country - and it's not just about Coca-Cola and Barbie-dolls.
It's about political influence, resources, money, ani-drug wars, etc.

I'm gonna tell you somehing:
You can start not giving a shiat about other countries and their felings and expectations towards you as soon as you start not influencing them anymore.
That includes corporate interests that are not shared by the average american citizen (but which is still percieved as american influence by these people).


Given our current state of globalization, this is hardly ever conna occur, so you'e damned to give a shiat.
That's the price you have to pay if you wanna take a leading role and if you wanna have a horse in any race. It's just as simple as that.


BTW:
This is not 'murica-bashing, though you might percieve it that way.
In fact, most people accross the pond would like to play along with America instead of just confronting each other.
That includes me.

But as long as you're continuing to look down onto your brethren from Europe (the "socialist guys" http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif ), you won't meet that many friends over here.

Maybe you should just admit that we're right at times instaed of calling us bunch of *insert phrase here* for not acting according to some outdated corporate idealism.


Like any other relationship, the transatlantic one is a mutual game and both sides have to play accordingly.
Nobody expects America to crawl other countries up the a$$, but you should at least START to understand their issues and problems and think about a solution that provides a good compromise.
Compromises aren't always bad, especially if you can win other people for your goals.

I don't think this is against any american interest - be it either military-wise or economics-wise.

[Urufu_Shinjiro]

Ok, I'll bite too:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Cajun76:
And a classic example of responding to points with attacks.

But I'll bite nonetheless:

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">invading Iraq for no reason</span>

I can think of several reasons. You cannot. Please explain how Iraq could be invaded (with Democrat's votes) for no reason. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Faked intelligence and a very effective scare campaign about WMD. It all seemed very plausible to the public (and congress) at the time but history shows that the top brass and the cabinet knew there was nothing to it, it was a con job.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">shredding the Constitution</span>

Please show a supposed example that hasn't been approved by Democrats as well or continued by the current administration. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The Patriot Act was read by 5% of those who voted on it, anyone who questioned it was labeled "soft/traitor/un-patriotic". It's being perpetuated for the same reasons, the dems are already being lambasted for being "weak on terror". I'm quite disappointed with the current administration that they haven't repealed the whole damn act already, though to be fair they have time still.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">shooting an old man in the face</span>

In the same vein, impregnating your mistress while your cancer-stricken wife struggles on and asking your aide to take the fall while paying said mistress with campaign money while working for the "poor" is the best view underneath the thin veneer of a Democrat.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'll agree with this one, kinda a cheap shot when there were other acts by the previous administration that could be called out.

[Ba5tard5word]

Man I already said I put the "shooting old man in face and forcing him to apologize for getting in the way of Cheney's bullets" thing in there to be silly... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

Conservatives really do get upset easily.

[LW_lcarp]

The ear of the leader must ring with the voices of the people - Woodrow Wilson

Leadership is the capacity and will to rally men and women to a common purpose and the character which inspires confidence - Bernard Montgomery

A great leader's courage to fulfill his vision comes from passion, not position - John C. Maxwell


I would have to say he is not passing the test of leadership. When he got elected people were losing their jobs, houses, retirements, and livelihoods. So what does he do he throws a butt load of money at the banks and car manufacturers and other various pork plans in the name of saving the economy. Then goes into a completely different tangent and throws National health care at the people.

Was he listening to the people? Was it more important to insure people without insurance? Would it of hurt to maybe get people back to work and then worked out a NHC system.

The days of true leadership in government are from a bygone era. Its not what would be good for the people but what cant I get for "my" gain.

[Urufu_Shinjiro]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ba5tard5word:
Man I already said I put the "shooting old man in face and forcing him to apologize for getting in the way of Cheney's bullets" thing in there to be silly... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

Conservatives really do get upset easily. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


I wrote that before I finished reading the thread, I'm usually more thorough than that. Also, I think that is the FIRST time I've been accused of being conservative on this forum, lol!

[Pirschjaeger]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Urufu_Shinjiro:
I think that is the FIRST time I've been accused of being conservative on this forum, lol! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So how was the tea party? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

[Urufu_Shinjiro]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pirschjaeger:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Urufu_Shinjiro:
I think that is the FIRST time I've been accused of being conservative on this forum, lol! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So how was the tea party? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

They rock man, I swear that lead singer is Jim Morrison, he's immortal and faked his death, moved to India, then moved to Canada to start a new rock career!

[triad773]

Yes he's failed- and I voted for the guy.

He said he'd end the wars- don't sound like he's going to any time very soon. That's just the first thing off the top of my head.

At least McCain has more experience http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

You cannot please everyone, or you end up pleasing no one (except the dudes in dark smoky rooms with tons of wealth).

[HayateAce]

Yes, B0 had a total of 143 days that he showed up in the Senate. Too many people decided to overlook this in favor of the HopeNchange smoke, mirror and laser show.

He was going to shut down GitMo too...and that has been a disaster across the board.

[leitmotiv]

http://www.baltimoresun.com/ne...0203,0,2306331.story (http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation-world/sc-dc-obama-dems04-20100203,0,2306331.story)

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a82c...9e-00144feab49a.html (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a82cfe04-10f5-11df-9a9e-00144feab49a.html)

[GAU-8]

he is leading us quite well i think!


into the depths of a hell. soyanora "free/strong U.S."

[horseback]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">quote:
I’ve found that in my lifetime, that when the world is pleased with us and our leaders, we’re betraying our ideals and damaging our own economic and military strengths and options. </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">By that you're saying that your "ideals" are held high by capturing people without any sentence, torture them and generally give a damn about your very own ideals of treating other humans.
That's basically what made your country somewhat less popular in the outside-world during the Bush II years.

Furthermore, you're stating that leading a war that was not backed by the UN, and that's basically ruining your economy and military strength (or would you say the US military is at a historic peak of strength with all the troops committed to two wars?) is actualy providing comfort for both, military and economy.

Sounds very off to me, as it contradicts itself.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>Are you saying that NO OTHER MODERN COUNTRY has or would detain persons who are believed to pose a threat to its citizens or use the necessary means to prevent them from carrying out acts of terror against its citizens or citizens of other Western/European countries? Or are you saying that because the Islamist terrorists who have declared war on us and our way of life are not officially sponsored by any recognizable government that we should treat every one of them as suspected criminals with all the rights and rules of evidence we require in our justice system, even when they are captured on the battlefield under arms against us?

Obviously, the wrong people sometimes get caught up in the wash; sh!t happens. It happens a lot more often when 4 out of 5 guys in the culture 99% of your enemies come out of are named Mohammed.

As for the UN, you will find that most Americans consider it a sorry charade that we are forced to put up with after 60 years of blatant corruption and phony outrage against everything we (or Israel) do. Very few of us would consider it to have any authority, moral or otherwise. Bringing it up as a vehicle for legality or change in the world order is only going to lead to some world class ugliness.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">quote:
I remember Jimmy Carter’s administration all too well, and how happy he made the outside world (especially the Soviet Union-except for that Moscow Olympics boycott thingie). I view this administration as being even worse in every meaningful way. </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Did you ever wonder why some islamic-fundamentalist hates you/ your country so much?
The reasons pretty much vary with each individual, but there's a core of reasons...

It's not "your" freedom or our values or because they wanna expand </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Actually, that is EXACTLY why they hate us (and you, if you don’t buy into their specific dogma). They’ve said so repeatedly. Of course, two thirds of the world is populated by cultures whose mores and values are essentially half-past Bronze Age; they are generally deeply xenophobic and under the impression that if you’re rich and they are poor, then you must have stolen it from them. Islam is pretty direct about people and nations who don’t submit to their version of God—if you aren’t one of them, you are their rightful prey.<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">It's because the very same attitude you're showing here - not giving a rat's *** about anything outside your country, while your country has influence all across the world. And there is a lot of influence of your country - and it's not just about Coca-Cola and Barbie-dolls. It's about political influence, resources, money, anti-drug wars, etc.

I'm gonna tell you something:
You can start not giving a shiat about other countries and their feelings and expectations towards you as soon as you start not influencing them anymore. That includes corporate interests that are not shared by the average American citizen (but which are still perceived as American influence by these people). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I know that you think that this is a Great Truth—that how you behave as a nation influences people to ‘like’ or ‘dislike’ you. Maybe it used to be true when America was far across the sea, had no major influence in ‘world (European) events’ and its’ citizens were so obviously better treated than most other ordinary people in the world, but now, when every little thing we do affects someone else, no matter what we do, someone is not going to benefit from our actions, and many folks are going to be flat out inconvenienced.

If we do something, anything, people get hurt. If we do nothing, other people get hurt. No matter what we do or don’t do, some people will benefit and some people will get hurt and the focus of the world is always going to be on the people who get hurt, regardless of the ratio of beneficiaries to victims.

You say the Arab/Islamic world hates us. I’ve heard them say that by dealing with the kleptocrats who ruled their countries during the Cold War, we helped stifle their ‘democratic movements’, and they hate us for that. These same people denounced us when we condemned or refused to deal with those same kleptocrats, claiming that we were interfering with their internal affairs. Like I said, I remember the Jimmy Carter years.

We have a saying about situations like this: “You’re damned if you do, and you’re damned if you don’t.”

Sometimes you are just hated for who you are. In this case, we are perceived as the heirs of the British and French bureaucrats who divided up the Ottoman Empire. We’re not fellow Muslims and we have more power than they do. By their rules, we are the Bad Guys, because by their rules, they couldn’t possibly have done anything wrong.<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Given our current state of globalization, this is hardly ever gonna occur, so you'e damned to give a shiat. That's the price you have to pay if you wanna take a leading role and if you wanna have a horse in any race. It's just as simple as that. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Of course we care, and far too many Americans are terribly confused because they honestly believe that Everyone Is the Same Under the Skin, and National and Cultural Prejudices Will All Go Away If We Just Play Nice and Smile at Each Other. The problem with the leading role is that everyone else thinks that they should have an equal say even when they haven’t paid (and aren’t about to pay) their share of the cost, never mind the same cost.

We didn’t ask for the leading role, and most of us would honestly say that we didn’t want it, BUT: There. Was. No. One. Else. Who. Could. Do. The. Stinking. Thankless. Job. And. It. Had. To. Be. Done. Right. Now. If we hadn’t, both of us would be very fluent in Russian and the Dialectic (and we wouldn’t be able to have this discussion for another fifty years or so, if ever).

From the late 1940s on, America has been like the guy who has been paying for every other round of beers for a group of 10 or 15 people every weekend; when he suggests that someone else starts buying more rounds, he’s called an @sshole.

Well, sometimes you need to be an @sshole and drink alone for a few weekends. Your friends either come to realize that you were carrying too much of the load and resume the relationship on a more equitable level, or maybe they aren’t worthy of your friendship.

Brems, it seems to me that you and I have very different views on how the world works, and we aren't likely to make the same assumptions about why things are the way they are. Many of your responses strike me as reflexive, just as mine undoubtedly seem to you.

Different cultures, different life experiences lead to differences of opinion even among people of approximately the same cultural/economic levels. Wow, what a concept.

People are different, and are not always going to agree.

cheers

horseback

cheers

[horseback]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">LEBillfish wrote:

Obama has done fine in the rediculous situation of the state of the nation when he started, the rediculousness of the above politics, and frankly all the suddenly open racism by many simply not taking him by his merits and accomplishments yet blindly opposing him and his efforts based on only the fact he wasn't your choice, or you're a lacky to the opposite party, or quite simply because he is not of your race......and due to any of those reasons or hundreds of others equally shallow and unfounded...will fight him tooth and nail till the day they die......Hell, he could find the cure for cancer, world peace, wealth and happiness for all and would still be fought on it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Mr. Obama has long been quite successful and quite enthusiastic by the way, slinging mud along with the rest of the politicians we love to hate. It was no coincidence that when he decided to run for the Senate, his most effective Democratic opponent got disqualified for the primaries on a technicality, and his original Republican opponent dropped out after embarrassing (and unconfirmed) charges from his ex-wife in his sealed divorce papers 'somehow' became public.

If I rejected the load of bilge that AlGore and John Kerrey were selling, why am I a racist now that an African American is trying to sell it?

As for the abuse he’s taken, it is a thimbleful compared to what the last three Republican presidents have had to put up with, and from the great unwashed, rather than from elected officials from the opposing party:

Taken from a column by Jay Nordlinger a while back:
quote:
They say that “hate” is rearing its head, and that President Obama and the Democrats are the victims of it. Let me make a couple of predictions: I predict that the chairman of the Republican National Committee will never say, “I hate the Democrats and everything they stand for. This [politics, basically] is a struggle of good and evil. And we’re the good.”

Howard Dean said that about the GOP: “I hate the Republicans and everything they stand for. . . .”

I predict that an editor of a conservative magazine will never write a piece called “The Case for Obama Hatred,” beginning, “I hate President Barack Obama.”

A New Republic editor did this, about Bush.

And there is increasing worry about assassination: that someone will take a shot, not just at the president, but at the first black president, which would be extra-catastrophic for the country. A few protesters have carried signs urging violence against Obama, or smacking of violence. Let me make some more predictions:

I predict that a network talk-show host will not show a video of President Obama giving a speech and put the following words on the screen: “SNIPERS WANTED.”

Craig Kilborn of CBS did that to George W. Bush.

I predict that U.S. senators will not joke about killing Obama.

In 2006, Bill Maher had a conversation with John Kerry. He asked Kerry what he’d gotten his wife for her birthday. Kerry said he had treated her to a vacation in Vermont. Maher said, “You could have went to New Hampshire and killed two birds with one stone.” Kerry replied, “Or I could have gone to 1600 Pennsylvania and killed the real bird with one stone.”

This is the same Kerry who, in 1988, said, “Somebody told me the other day that the Secret Service has orders that if George Bush is shot, they’re to shoot Quayle.” Then he said, “There isn’t any press here, is there?”

I predict that a New York official will not tell a graduating class about assassinating President Obama.

Also in 2006, comptroller Alan Hevesi said to students at Queens College that Sen. Charles Schumer, his fellow Democrat, would “put a bullet between the president’s eyes if he could get away with it.”

I predict that no columnist for a leading European newspaper, and leading world newspaper, will write, “John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr. — where are you now that we need you?”

Charlie Brooker of the Guardian did that to George W. Bush.

I predict that no major writer will write a novel debating the morality of killing President Obama.

Nicholson Baker did that to Bush, with Checkpoint.

I predict that no filmmaker will make a “fictional documentary” that fantasizes — and I’m afraid that is the word — about murdering President Obama.

Some Brits did that to President Bush with Death of a President.

Dear readers, I have made very, very safe predictions. If a CBS talk-show host pictured President Obama and said “SNIPERS WANTED,” he would lose his job, of course. He would never work in the media again. I wonder what else would happen to him.

I could go on, but you’ve heard enough.
Maybe it isn't just the 'nutjobs' on the left; maybe you can say anything about conservatives and Republicans and it no longer sounds horrific because it has been mainstreamed without comment beyond the usual "that's just politics" as long as you agree with it.

Wake up.

cheers

horseback

[WhiteKnight77]

Horseback, both you and I know that the left enjoys using the double standard. They only see what they want to see and **** all who can see it happening no matter what the party. We both know that the mainstream media are shills of the left save for one network and then they denounce them as biased as they do not espouse what other media outlets do. They object to altering the name of the President as it is demeaning, but then do the very same thing in calling the Tea Party movement Tea Baggers and they are made up of average citizens. Talk about elitist.

The left wants their cake and eat it, but there are those who remember everything that went on when others were President.

[leitmotiv]

Not his week:

"corpse"-men praised

http://beltwayblips.dailyradar...-obama-a-corpse-man/ (http://beltwayblips.dailyradar.com/story/is-obama-a-corpse-man/)

[WhiteKnight77]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by leitmotiv:
Not his week:

"corpse"-men praised

http://beltwayblips.dailyradar...-obama-a-corpse-man/ (http://beltwayblips.dailyradar.com/story/is-obama-a-corpse-man/) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://www.cultofmac.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/DoubleFacePalm.jpg

[HayateAce]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_eUUNbiupCds/SdPc4bImAiI/AAAAAAAAACo/vQsTYPYnrWU/S220/TOTUS1.png

The teleprompter cannot show him how to pronounce words. Especially military terms, him being the CIC and all....

What a laugh that is.

[leitmotiv]

What say now all the partisan buffoons who accused Bush of being ******ed for his Texas-English howlers? Every high school drop-out knows you don't say drum and bugle "corpse"! To have reached Obama's advanced age without being able to properly pronounce "corps" represents a considerable non-achievement.

http://i154.photobucket.com/albums/s261/G6AS/3Screenshot2010-01-19at81133PM.png

[Ba5tard5word]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I wrote that before I finished reading the thread, I'm usually more thorough than that. Also, I think that is the FIRST time I've been accused of being conservative on this forum, lol! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No jeez I was talking about them, not you! You're like the least partisan person here.

[RAF_OldBuzzard]

Test of leadership?

Lets compare 2 different circumstances.

1. A President, with both houses being controlled buy the opposition party, getting almost all of his legislative proposals passed.

2.A President, with both houses controlled by his party, getting nothing passed.

I know which one I'd call a LEADER, and which I'd call a failure.

Of course all the Lib's heads will explode once they figure out that #1 above was Ronald Regan, and that #2, is Barak Obama.

By the time that Obama's term is up, the only person in the United States that will be happy with him will be Jimmy Carter, because he will no longer be considered the worst President in history.

[SterlingX]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RAF_OldBuzzard:
Test of leadership?

Lets compare 2 different circumstances.

1. A President, with both houses being controlled buy the opposition party, getting almost all of his legislative proposals passed.

2.A President, with both houses controlled by his party, getting nothing passed.

I know which one I'd call a LEADER, and which I'd call a failure.

Of course all the Lib's heads will explode once they figure out that #1 above was Ronald Regan, and that #2, is Barak Obama.

By the time that Obama's term is up, the only person in the United States that will be happy with him will be Jimmy Carter, because he will no longer be considered the worst President in history. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://www.theonion.com/conten...an_raised_from_grave (http://www.theonion.com/content/video/zombie_reagan_raised_from_grave)

http://www.moviehole.net/wp-content/uploads/zombieland_df-06937c.jpg

[JG52Uther]

US unemployment figures at a 9 month low apparently.
Must be doing a terrible job...

[Rjel]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Uther:
US unemployment figures at a 9 month low apparently.
Must be doing a terrible job... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

We all see exactly what we want to see in all aspects of American politics. If we wanted to believe Bush was a failure, there were stats to support it. If we want the same thing for Obama, there are obviously stats to support that too. I still find it ridiculous to declare this President a failure after a single year in office.

As the subject of this thread seems to be of interest to board members all over the world for all the reasons mentioned by several of you, I would only say that you can't take the views posted here as a true cross section of U.S. opinion. Just hang on a little bit, someone will be along soon with a graph showing declining numbers of something, an unnamed source indicating failure somewhere or a poll by Fox News to show how The Left is leading America to ruination and despair.

[LEBillfish]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by horseback:
Mr. Obama.......... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Correction....."President Obama"....

Like it or not if an American he is YOUR president.....and if he is NOT your president....then you are not an American.

K2

[Rjel]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEBillfish:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by horseback:
Mr. Obama.......... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Correction....."President Obama"....

Like it or not if an American he is YOUR president.....and if he is NOT your president....then you are not an American.

K2 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's where we have allowed the presidency to be minimized. I think it all began when President Nixon so misused his office. Now we (on both sides) show disrespect, not only to the sitting president, but to the office too.

[HayateAce]

Mister 0bama, Barry Soetoro or B0 are just as acceptable as GWB, etc.

[Bremspropeller]

Ok, the thread headed for another right-wing pr1ck-waving contest.
No surprise there, be sure.

What is surprisng, though, is how full of shiat some people in here are http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

[stalkervision]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEBillfish:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by horseback:
Mr. Obama.......... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Correction....."President Obama"....

Like it or not if an American he is YOUR president.....and if he is NOT your president....then you are not an American.

K2 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

that only applies to Republican presidents. Even when they suck! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

[Cajun76]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bremspropeller:
Ok, the thread headed for another right-wing pr1ck-waving contest.
No surprise there, be sure.

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">What is surprisng, though, is how full of shiat some people in here are</span> http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You mean how some post a 1930-40's pic of a totalitarian, organized military function and speech and compare it to a grass-roots movement of ordinary people to limit the power of government and make that government act responsibly?

It's coming out of your ears... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

[Bremspropeller]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Like it or not if an American he is YOUR president.....and if he is NOT your president....then you are not an American. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Worn-out phrases 101 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

[Bremspropeller]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">You mean how some post a 1930-40's pic of a totalitarian, organized military function and speech and compare it to a grass-roots movement of ordinary people to limit the power of government and make that government act responsibly? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The very same people that agreed on patriot-act that factually "limited" the power of government, yes http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[Worf101]

I talked to an old friend, a federal judge, the other day about the current state of affairs. I asked him to grade Obama first year and give me his reasoning. He said as follows.

Grade B-Minus. His reasoning being that considering the backlash and mess he's inherited that he's even able to stand up at night is a bloody miracle.

1. It's only been one year! Hell you even give coach of the Clippers more than one year to proove himself!

2. Despire the GOP's contention we've NOT been successfully attacked by hoardes of bomb throwing militants.

3. The WORLD economy is slowy improving.

4. He has met several international crises with speed and effectiveness (Haiti et al)

5. Even if ultimately unsuccessful he's opened a dialogue with the nations enemies.

6. And if accounts are to be believed is steadily droning some of those enemies into the netherworld.

7. Some Americans are like spoiled children, they expect problems that took DECADES to form(debt, competition, health care crises, war..etc...) to be solved overnight. As a friend said about Viet Nam, it took us just as long to get out of it as it did to get into it.

8. There's a substantial portion of the American electorate that will never, ever support nor follow him and would sooner see the nation destroyed as live under what they consider his illegitimate and tyrannical rule. You can't poo poo these people or dismiss them as nutbag no matter how deluded you might think they are? Why? Because they're heavily armed and are quite willing to kill (though not necessarily die) for their beliefs.

9. This is a democracy, not a dictatorship. If the American people decide overnight to change their minds, so be it. We'll suffer the consequences as a nation for good or for ill.

10. Obama has made mistakes, yet unlike his predecessors, he readily admits them. No one comes into the Presidency knowing everything.

11. Recent history. Remember Clintons first years in office. Very similar, matter of fact WORSE. He lost a health care struggle and the republicans took over the House with Gingrich at the helm. Bad as things look for him now, they could've been worse.

My personal take is what will be will be. If the country "swings right" again so be it, if it doesn't so be it. If the experiment that was/is America is to continue it will survive this current identity crises. If it does not see its way clear, it will join all the other bygone empires of history.

Worf

[erco415]

A lot of replies here- some are posting reasons why the President hasn't accomplished his goals, or pointing out that other presidents have done worse -but few responses actually addressing his leadership.

My favorite kinds of books are autobiographies followed closely by biographies. When I question the President's leadership ability, I do so from a perspective informed by the accounts of men and women who led, often under the most trying of circumstances, and were successful, though they may not have always won.

I'm comparing the President to leaders like Shackleton, Lombardi, Churchill, Cochran, Boyington, Horner, Fluckey, Patton, and even a guy like Cab Calloway! These men and women had different leadership styles, but there was no question of their ability to lead, no doubt about that whatsoever.

And while it may be a bit unfair to compare the President to such men and women who have made their places in history, I can't help but notice if he shares certain traits with them, or does not, as the case my be.

In Tom Clancy's excellent Every Man A Tiger, which is a profile of USAF General Chuck Horner, there is a section that details the late 70's/early 80's transformation of Tactical Air Command from a dysfunctional organization to one of excellence. In many ways, I think that the troubles that plagued TAC parallel the problems we face today with our federal government. Problems, incidentally, that our President promised to, and needs to, address.

The man behind the transformation of TAC was General Bill Creech. One of the many things he did was to send a message to everyone concerned that there was a new sheriff in town, and that the way TAC did business was going to change. From Every Man A tiger:

"He also made sure these changes were built on a foundation of absolute truth. Lying, shading of the truth, and making excuses were completely unacceptable. To make that point clear throughout TAC, Creech made a number of highly visible "public executions"."

Clancy goes on to explain how most TAC units were falsifying scores made with a bombing system called Dive Toss. The system didn't work, but units were rated on how well they scored using the system. These ratings could determine the future of a commander's career, so the aircrews would make manual bomb runs and report them as Dive Toss runs. The only thing that suffered was integrity. When Gen. Creech got wind of this (courtesy of a pilot who had an attack of conscience) there was an ivestigation in which everyone in the wing admitted what they were doing, except for the wing commander (a pilot also) who earned a very public firing. Also from EMAT:

"Afterward, everyone got the message that there was a new way of doing business that depended on telling the truth, that bad news was acceptable if you had done your best and still failed, and that lying and shading the truth to look good were far worse than failing."

The thing about this account that applies to the current question of President Obama's leadership abilities, is that the President talked a great deal about changing the way things were done in Washington. The American public is in support of such changes. But the new sheriff never showed up. It's business as usual. The President isn't doing the things a good leader committed to change would do. Again, I'm not talking about the success of his efforts- it took time to reform TAC, it will take time to reform our government -I'm talking about the message the President is sending by his actions.

Another thing that suggests to me that the President lacks leadership abilities is his continued blaming of others for our current situation. Even though this is true, to one degree or another, no leader who's worth anything would blame others in this fashion. Gen Chuck Horner puts it this way:

"If you want responsibility, if you want the tough jobs, then you better be ready to stand up and take the criticism and all the anguish when things go wrong. If you can't take the blame- even for mistakes that are beyond your control- then you are not in a responsible job, no matter what the job title says. The big jobs involve risk of great personal criticism. The jobs worth having are the ones with the biggest downside, and if you don't admit your own mistakes, you are not worthy of the trust given to you."

I can't imagine any real leader allowing someone else to take responsibility for something happening on their watch.

[blairgowrie]

Very nice post Erco.

[Messaschnitzel]

Hey Erco, With General Creech's case, I believe that he had complete command authority to do what he deemed necessary to get the job done. In President Obama's case, even though he is 'in charge', he does not have complete authority to do as he pleases, and will have to go along with the currents that drive both the Republican and Democrat lawmakers to whatever awaits the U.S... and then be the fall guy with the results. This goes with any President, past, present, and future. I will be surprised that anyone will be willing to become the President of the United States in the future, because it will seem to be more of a sentence for punishment rather than a feather in the cap. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

What is going on now in the U.S. reminds me of reading about an unfortunate event in history that happened a long time ago:

During the attempted French invasion of Portsmouth in 1545, when hailing the Mary Rose about what her trouble was when she was in apparent distress, the last words heard from Vice Admiral Sir George Carew reportedly were "I have the sort of knaves I cannot rule!" Within less than one minute, according to one account, the Mary Rose disappeared with "one long wailing cry." Sir George's younger brother, Peter Carew later described the Mary Rose's crew as amongst the finest mariners in all England, but said that there was such dissention among them that "contending in envy, they perished in frowardness."

[Cajun76]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bremspropeller:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">You mean how some post a 1930-40's pic of a totalitarian, organized military function and speech and compare it to a grass-roots movement of ordinary people to limit the power of government and make that government act responsibly? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The very same people that agreed on patriot-act that factually "limited" the power of government, yes http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The Tea Party movement has nothing to do with the PA. You and others have no clue what the Tea Party is all about. The original Boston Tea Party was a protest, not a cry for revolution or secession. And protest is what the new Tea Party is all about, no matter how hard propagandists try to spin it.

While I might expect smug eliteism from some such as you when discussing any "savages" that live outside Europe, the showers of Kool-Aid from the Left that are trying to douse or dilute the Tea Party movement are truly pathetic.

As much as the Left try and paint themselves as educated, and as much as they howled about (especially) the last two years of Bush's deficits (Democrat Congress approving them), most are strangley silent in regards of the staggering amounts that Obama has put forth.

The Democrats who aren't silent and are brave enough to speak up about these financial shenanigans are part of the Tea Party movement, just like independents, Republicans and libertarians.

[SeaFireLIV]

I know little of the American situation but even this foreigner of your lands can see that he can`t have done anything so spectacularly bad in the space of ONE year. I mean, look at Bush, you guys gave him two terms and he wasn`t even in control!

[Ba5tard5word]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The thing about this account that applies to the current question of President Obama's leadership abilities, is that the President talked a great deal about changing the way things were done in Washington. The American public is in support of such changes. But the new sheriff never showed up. It's business as usual. The President isn't doing the things a good leader committed to change would do. Again, I'm not talking about the success of his efforts- it took time to reform TAC, it will take time to reform our government -I'm talking about the message the President is sending by his actions. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

a) in some respects Obama's 1st year in office and the Dem Congress have been among the most legislatively successful in decades, but the popular narrative is that they don't do anything because they've become stalled on health care thanks to a couple of Senators.

b) also in many ways Obama has brought the change, but the problem is that a lot of Americans and especially lobbyists and bankers don't want it. They don't want health care reform, they don't want banking reform, they don't want a Democrat as president, etc etc.

c) if he had succeeded more, conservatives would be complaining, I know you're a conservative and I'm not going to mock you or criticize you for that or anything but I constantly see conservatives in the media mocking Obama for "not doing anything" when the rest of the time they are crying about him destroying America with his massive changes to government. Colbert recently did a funny bit where he contrasted Fox news types complaining that Obama does nothing with ones where they were crying bloody murder about how he was destroying America...with his massive changes to government.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Another thing that suggests to me that the President lacks leadership abilities is his continued blaming of others for our current situation. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


If you want to see leadership then watch (if you haven't already, you probably already have) Obama's appearance before the GOP last week, it was pretty amazing. No teleprompter (and no heckling from the GOP either! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif), no prepared speech, just Obama discussing things and taking them to task. You'd never see Bush do that type of thing. Clinton and maybe Reagan could have but Presidents usually cut themselves off from the media and from the opposition, unlike the UK we don't have a question and answer session on public TV, I think we need to have more of that.

[Bremspropeller]

The Tea Party movement has nothing to do with the PA.

<span class="ev_code_GREEN">Really? Didn't you claim people wanted to protest against "large government"?
Most funnyly, the very same people were applauding PA when it came in.
</span>


You and others have no clue what the Tea Party is all about.

<span class="ev_code_GREEN">Wrong.</span>


The original Boston Tea Party was a protest, not a cry for revolution or secession. And protest is what the new Tea Party is all about, no matter how hard propagandists try to spin it.

<span class="ev_code_GREEN">A protest by hillbillies and the counties first xxxx. Hardly a protest. It's more like a crying-congress of sore losers and people that live in yesterday's reality.</span>


While I might expect smug eliteism from some such as you when discussing any "savages" that live outside Europe, the showers of Kool-Aid from the Left that are trying to douse or dilute the Tea Party movement are truly pathetic.

<span class="ev_code_GREEN">What's that crap "elitism" all about? Yes, I know that government health-care works. I don't need to prove it anymore; the figures speak for themselves. There's no elitism envolved, though I have to admit I sometimes feel like a grown-up trying to figure out what all the kiddies are crying about http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif </span>


As much as the Left try and paint themselves as educated,

<span class="ev_code_GREEN">They usually are. Contrary to most home-schoolers (who are - you guessed it - mostly right-wingers) they've actually seen a university from inside. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif</span>

and as much as they howled about (especially) the last two years of Bush's deficits (Democrat Congress approving them), most are strangley silent in regards of the staggering amounts that Obama has put forth.

<span class="ev_code_GREEN">Compared with ole Dubyah, there hasn't been any feck-up so far to brag about, other than his teleprompter breaking. I wonder what ole Dubyah would have made out of if http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif </span>

The Democrats who aren't silent and are brave enough to speak up about these financial shenanigans are part of the Tea Party movement, just like independents, Republicans and libertarians.

<span class="ev_code_GREEN">All hail them. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sleepzzz.gif Right after asking ourselves who invited the financial boogie-man.</span>

[erco415]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Hey Erco, With General Creech's case, I believe that he had complete command authority to do what he deemed necessary to get the job done. In President Obama's case, even though he is 'in charge', he does not have complete authority to do as he pleases, and will have to go along with the currents that drive both the Republican and Democrat lawmakers to whatever awaits the U.S... and then be the fall guy with the results. This goes with any President, past, present, and future. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Quite right, but you've missed my point- it's not about what the president can accomplish, or what limits there are on his authority. My point is that the President is not exhibiting the characteristics of a strong leader.

[Ba5tard5word]

Also it's pretty ridiculous for conservatives to complain about Obama "getting nothing done" when anything he is stalled on is pretty much entirely due to Republican obstructionism.

A GOP Senator is now blocking all Obama appointees because he wants $40 BILLION in military earmark spending for a foreign company (Airbus) that happens to have a factory in his district.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes...hold-on-nominees/?hp (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/05/white-house-blasts-shelby-hold-on-nominees/?hp)

How are you supposed to get anyone done if you can't place people in positions because some Senator wants some pork?

[Ba5tard5word]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">My point is that the President is not exhibiting the characteristics of a strong leader. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

He's 10,000 times better and more humble and more competent and more of a leader who takes responsibility for things under his watch than Bush ever was and that's all that I and a lot of people care about. Obama is maybe not as charismatic as Clinton but the same people who hate Obama hated Clinton very loudly.

[SterlingX]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by erco415:


The thing about this account that applies to the current question of President Obama's leadership abilities, is that the President talked a great deal about changing the way things were done in Washington. The American public is in support of such changes. But the new sheriff never showed up. It's business as usual. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Mostly true. In his actions, change gained the meaning of doing some of the things his worst enemies want him to do, unlike them, who wouldn't do any of the things their worst enemies(him) may want them to do. And they want business as usual, which they have repeatedly stated in terms of actual policies, and in all discussed policies. The actual fault lays in not throwing certain individuals in jail for treason (by any means necessary). The nitwit obstructionist chorus is so emboldened precisely because he decided he wouldn't hold certain people accountable. A wakey-wakey slap in the face is badly overdue, probably too late for people sunk so deeply in coma.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Another thing that suggests to me that the President lacks leadership abilities is his continued blaming of others for our current situation. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is simply factually false. On top of being factually false, it comes across as defining a true leader as someone who would say:
"The patient, who suffers from anemia, was treated for 8 years by bloodletting three times a day, to cure him of his healthy condition, prior to the beginning of the treatment. The priority of recovery and action demands that we forgot, erased those 8 years from our memory .5..4..3..2..1.. &lt;snaps fingers&gt;
The patient is clearly very healthy, and does not need blood transfusions as suggested by some."

[Messaschnitzel]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by erco415:
Quite right, but you've missed my point- it's not about what the president can accomplish, or what limits there are on his authority. My point is that the President is not exhibiting the characteristics of a strong leader. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I understood your point. What I was attempting to say was that no matter how strong and charismatic a leader might seem to come across, the folks he works with have to more or less agree, or otherwise compromise to whatever degree through the various time tested and traditional means that all politicians use to their own advantage. In other words, a leader must achieve a series of publicly successful victories to support a strong leadership image. Also keep in mind the fickleness of the U.S public in almost everything they see, including politicians, where once folks gets on a losing streak, they gets wrote off and laughed at. To quote George C. Scott as General Patton in his opening speech: "Americans love a winner, ...and will not tolerate a loser." I think applies to politics as well.

Consider what kind of success General Creech would potentially have had if he had to negotiate his plans in accordance with a large bipartisan committee that disliked each other, maligned each other, and even disagreed within their own ranks. Add to this the established greed and corruption with both parties in the political establishment, and most likely General Creech would have been relieved of his duties had he been required to perform under these hypothetical conditions, in spite of his charismatic, manly, uncompromising and hard@ssed leadership characteristics which had no real authority to back up those same characteristics above. In other words, a paper tiger who gets nothing done unless it is in the personal interests of those under his command, which only reinforces the existing status quo.

[LW_lcarp]

To say any politician has been a leader of the U.S. for the last 50 plus years (probably longer then 50)is a laugh. Everyone of them from the President down to the lowliest town councilman is only in it for their "own" gain. Campaign promises are a joke to them. They should just call them "lies to get me elected" from the get go.

A true leader serves the people they lead.


Maybe if the "leaders" of this country would start doing that instead of serving themselves or their political party they would find that we all have a common ground and can and will be able to avoid the current troubles that are now taking place in D.C. as well as town halls across this country.

[erco415]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Messaschnitzel:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by erco415:
Quite right, but you've missed my point- it's not about what the president can accomplish, or what limits there are on his authority. My point is that the President is not exhibiting the characteristics of a strong leader. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I understood your point. What I was attempting to say was that no matter how strong and charismatic a leader might seem to come across, the folks he works with have to more or less agree, or otherwise compromise to whatever degree through the various time tested and traditional means that all politicians use to their own advantage. In other words, a leader must achieve a series of publicly successful victories to support a strong leadership image. Also keep in mind the fickleness of the U.S public in almost everything they see, including politicians, where once folks gets on a losing streak, they gets wrote off and laughed at. To quote George C. Scott as General Patton in his opening speech: "Americans love a winner, ...and will not tolerate a loser." I think applies to politics as well.

Consider what kind of success General Creech would potentially have had if he had to negotiate his plans in accordance with a large bipartisan committee that disliked each other, maligned each other, and even disagreed within their own ranks. Add to this the established greed and corruption with both parties in the political establishment, and most likely General Creech would have been relieved of his duties had he been required to perform under these hypothetical conditions, in spite of his charismatic, manly, uncompromising and hard@ssed leadership characteristics which had no real authority to back up those same characteristics above. In other words, a paper tiger who gets nothing done unless it is in the personal interests of those under his command, which only reinforces the existing status quo. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I get what you're saying, but there is much that the President could have done that required no cooperation from anyone. For example, both candidates pledged to reduce or eliminate the abuse of earmarks. Imagine that President Obama, instead of signing the earmark-laden spending bill congress sent him, vetoes it and makes a point of telling the media that things have changed, that business as usual is over, and Congress, don't send me another bill like this one cause I'll veto that one too. Imagine what that would have done for his credibility, imagine how that would have changed the conversation in Washington. The President needed NO ONE'S help to do that.

[erco415]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">If you want to see leadership then watch (if you haven't already, you probably already have) Obama's appearance before the GOP last week, it was pretty amazing. No teleprompter (and no heckling from the GOP either! ), no prepared speech, just Obama discussing things and taking them to task. You'd never see Bush do that type of thing. Clinton and maybe Reagan could have but Presidents usually cut themselves off from the media and from the opposition, unlike the UK we don't have a question and answer session on public TV, I think we need to have more of that. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agreed. Though I think we may be victims of editing, as the footage I've watched (and it wasn't a great deal) showed the President admitting that the Reps did offer a plan, that health care wouldn't have been what they were promising etc. No, that particular session would be the sort of thing as long as it didn't become a stage for political grandstanding. (and it seems that we're back to business as usual this week)


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Also it's pretty ridiculous for conservatives to complain about Obama "getting nothing done" when anything he is stalled on is pretty much entirely due to Republican obstructionism. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'd like to know how the Reps could legislatively obstruct anything at all in 2009?


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">This is simply factually false. On top of being factually false, it comes across as defining a true leader as someone who would say:
"The patient, who suffers from anemia, was treated for 8 years by bloodletting three times a day, to cure him of his healthy condition, prior to the beginning of the treatment. The priority of recovery and action demands that we forgot, erased those 8 years from our memory .5..4..3..2..1.. &lt;snaps fingers&gt;
The patient is clearly very healthy, and does not need blood transfusions as suggested by some." </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No Sterling, a true leader doesn't dwell on the past- what good comes of it? It makes a leader look weak- better he should simply acknowledge the situation and tell us what he's going to do about it. Our President likes to do both...

[Ba5tard5word]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I'd like to know how the Reps could legislatively obstruct anything at all in 2009? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not sure what you mean. The GOP voted against pretty much any bill written by a Dem in 2009 and continue to do so. The Dems were able to get quite a lot done early on because all of their caucus voted on it, and they aren't doing that now with health care because it's such a contentious issue and it's easy for someone like Lieberman or Nelson to hold up the entire process.

Probably the dumbest part is how GOP members of Congress voted against the stimulus plan, then went back to their district bragging about all the money they got for the bill they voted against, or how Bobby Jindal argued against it then went around handing giant novelty checks of stimulus money signed "Bobby Jindal" to people in Louisiana. Durr...

[Messaschnitzel]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by erco415:
I get what you're saying, but there is much that the President could have done that required no cooperation from anyone. For example, both candidates pledged to reduce or eliminate the abuse of earmarks. Imagine that President Obama, instead of signing the earmark-laden spending bill congress sent him, vetoes it and makes a point of telling the media that things have changed, that business as usual is over, and Congress, don't send me another bill like this one cause I'll veto that one too. Imagine what that would have done for his credibility, imagine how that would have changed the conversation in Washington. The President needed NO ONE'S help to do that. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree. I am not entirely surprised about President Obama not following up on some of his campaign promises because he is after all a politician, and politicians on the campaign trail will promise the sky to folks who want to hear that.

Also, the President needs to get shed of that 'Caspar Milquetoast' public image. Maybe he should start taking boxing and wrestling lessons, and then enter into a MMA competition in his weight class? Witness how popular Jesse Ventura was as Governor of Minnesota. I'll bet that he could take on any politician from any other state at the time in an empty hand sport combat match, and win every time. Heck, I probably would've voted for Ventura for President if he only would've thrown his hat in the ring! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

[Bearcat99]

There is so much of the typical BS in this thread from the same old hats... that I gave up on quoting and replying to any of it directly... Billfish & Worf made two of the best posts in the thread.....

But to say that Fox News and Republican obstructionism... just saying no because it might make the other party look like they are succeeding and then we may not get back in for decades... is not a factor in some of what the President has not accomplished is classic http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif .

De Nile is not just a river in Egypt.

Republicans don't want him to consider their "plans" they want him to adopt their plans lock stock and barrel.. and they refuse to compromise one bit... They start this campaign ****ging the Dems about messing with medicare... (I won't even go into the whole "death panel" bit... that says mouthfulls...) then they come up with a plan.. that does the same thing.... They would rather play politics than govern... and because the lobbyists and big business have most of them in their pockets.... on both sides of the aisle.. we will be playing the blame game for a while.

Our collective government is the Nero fiddling .. while Rome burns.. and when the president says... "Hey guys.... we need to get to task on doing what the American people have elected us to do.. instead of playing politics.." Well h@ll that isn't leadership... that's just an empty suit still in campaign mode.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif riiiight.. When the President says... "Look .... health care costs are a huge part of our budget.. and every small businesses budget.. We need to get this under control..." He gets labeled everything from a Marxist to an incompetent fool... riiiiight... People still call him an empty suit.. and claim that he lacks the intelligence to lead us.. Intelligence is one thing the man is not lacking.. He has his flaws for sure.. but that isn't one of them... Oh yeah... he said Corpse.. instead of corps.. well that proves he's a dumb@ss... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif and when he says.. "We need to get off the oil so we can become energy independent.. and in doing so create jobs right here in the U.S. jobs that will last... " and "We heed to stop giving tax breaks to companies that send jobs overseas... and start giving them to companies that will create and keep them here... " and "WE heed to make education more affordable so that we wont have to import our Drs, physicists & chemists from overseas... but get them here"... and "This is going to be hard.. and we will have to make hard choices.. but we MUST act.." .. well heck man... that isn't leadership... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Riiiiiiiiiiiigggght......

The man gets elected to one of the worse situations this country has faced in 70 years.. and in some ways it is worse.. and after one year we aren't riding the crest of a wave... and we get all this failed leadership stuff... and Fux News is RELENTLESS... they have made it their mission in life to criticize,minimalize,trivialize,scandalize EVERY SINGLE POSITIVE THING SAID BY ANYONE.. about this president. Again to the detriment of the country.

Tea Party.. yahhh right. This whole tea party movement is a direct response to President Obama being elected... it has nothing to do with any of the rhetoric the folks who claim it is such a noble venture keep claiming.. They may believe that.... but the movement itself was started by people who just refused to get on with December 2008. Less government? We have seen what less government can bring.. and right now it is only the government, those elected to run it.. who can turn this mess around.. anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool. If Senator McCain had been elected I guarantee you that the country would not be in any better shape than it is in right now in the year since the election... in fact if McCain ran the country like he ran his campaign.. we might be less far along on the road to recovery... but we wouldn't have a Tea Party movement.. Be sure....

Everybody wants a fix.. but no one wants to be the one to pay for it.. to do what needs to be done.. and not spend.. or raise any taxes.. is not possible.. and I wonder where our deficit would be today had we not been spending @ 12,BILLION a month on the Iraq war.. Oh yeah.. but that's in the past ... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif uhhhhh Yeah but that's the "war on terror"... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif Uhhhhh yeah but Dems signed on for that too.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Yeah some of them did.... and they deserve a good slap for it too.. at the least.. but our current president was against it from the start. The media? Well the media practically laid down and went to sleep when the "debate" about the war was raging.. Responsible journalists and any dissenters were labeled unpatriotic ..... and all the lies and BS of Darth Vader Cheny and that real empty suit Rumsfeld were pushed right through.. even though one of the most respected military men in the country.. who just happened to be S.O.S. (Not to mention the J.C.O.S. Chairman.. who was "dismissed" for his input..) was saying "waitaminnit guys.." and echoing Roy Schieder in Jaws.. "You're gonna need a bigger boat..." ...


BUT NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!

_{and here we are....}

but again.. that's all in the past... this is today... and Our president is incompetent and a failure.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif
....... because.... he can't get cooperation from his fellow elected officials.. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif
.... who seem to think we are in the 80s.... and just say NO......... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Tell you one thing.... If the American people don't get their heads out of their collective @sses .. and quick.. and stop falling for the BS of voting for their "values" (Doesn't mean a d@mn thing... unless you are running... and the guy running?What are you stupid? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif He's a politician for crying out loud.. he'll say what ever he thinks will get him elected.. . You LIVE your values... You vote with your head.. not your heart. You vote with the expectations that you have from your elected officials in mind.. and throw the rascals out when they don't deliver or move in the direction of delivering. ) or falling for the sound bite rhetoric.. voting based on "commentary" rather than news.. we are in store for even tougher times... Even if President Obama and the collective government manage to turn things around.. (and I am really curious to hear the choruses of negativity that are still going to be there regardless... because a lot of this IS about the man... ) If we are not careful we will be right back here in another decade or so....

Power concedes nothing without struggle. Right now.. We the People.. do not have it.... and with the latest supreme court decision... it may finally be time for the fork... This certainly isn't your granddaddy's America.


For all the rhetoric about what "The American people" want... it still strikes me as so unusual... and down right peculiar... that we got where we are today.... from our imbalance of trade... to the banking industry... to the healthcare issues... all of it... because lawmakers passed laws that changed the rules so that we could collectively be put here by the companies that run those and other industries and we were so busy going OOooooo and Ahhhhh and succumbuing to our basest insticnts.... (Us vs Them.. whoever they are.. we can insert them as needed.. it can be conservatives,blacks,liberals,gays,evangelicals,im migrants,whites,muslims or __________) Nobody came in here and stole our jobs... while we were out on vacation..... businesses GAVE THEM AWAY TO MAKE MORE MONEY.


WTFU PEROPLE!!!!!!!!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

[RAF_OldBuzzard]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Ba5tard5word:
Also it's pretty ridiculous for conservatives to complain about Obama "getting nothing done" when anything he is stalled on is pretty much entirely due to Republican obstructionism. .../QUOTE]


OH PULEEEEESSSEEEEE

Obama had (at least up to the recent special election in MA) a SUPER MAJORITY in the Senate. A FILIBUSTER PROOF majority, and they still wouldn't vote for "Obama Care".

The "obstructionist" Republicans would have been powerless to stop it. Obstructionists my ***.

What's REALLY happening is that there are enough Democratic Congressmen and Senators that KNOW that Obama's policies are doomed to fail, and they don't want to be caught in the backlash. They were all "hoping", that some Republicans would vote with them so that when they DID fail, they could all say "Well, the Republicans went along wit it. It wasn't all out fault."

[LW_lcarp]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bearcat99:
Nobody came in here and stole our jobs... while we were out on vacation..... businesses GAVE THEM AWAY TO MAKE MORE MONEY.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I may not agree with alot of what you believe Bearcat but that statement right there says it all about the whole situation

[DrHerb]

Its like half of the people here wont be happy till the man is impeached or assassinated.

Nobody gets it, Politicians tell you what you WANTto hear come election race time. Once they are in office, almost all the promises are nulled and voided, it happens EVERYWHERE.

[Bearcat99]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RAF_OldBuzzard:
What's REALLY happening is that there are enough Democratic Congressmen and Senators that KNOW that Obama's policies are doomed to fail, and they don't want to be caught in the backlash. They were all "hoping", that some Republicans would vote with them so that when they DID fail, they could all say "Well, the Republicans went along wit it. It wasn't all out fault." </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No what's really happening is that due to the likes of Beck,Hannity et al... many cowardly Democrats are more worried about getting reelected than doing what is good for the country.. and because Fox News has subliminally passed itself off as the Net work of the people... and many politicians know this... so they act accordingly... Whether the policies are doomed to fail or not failure to act will certainly doom us all...

[leitmotiv]

An error of the most elementary sort: what is good for the political career of the President does not necessarily coincide with what is good for the country.

[Ba5tard5word]

+100 to what Bearcat said.

[Bearcat99]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by leitmotiv:
An error of the most elementary sort: what is good for the political career of the President does not necessarily coincide with what is good for the country. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The reverse is also true... and I am not talking about his political career... I am talking about the fact that every single thing that this administration tries to put forth is bad mouthed ad nauseum by the right... Most voally by the likes of Fox News... everything... According to some this administration has done nothing good... will do nothing good.. and cannot ever do anything good... except loose the next election .. and I am sorry... NO ADMINISTARTION.... NOT EVEN THE PREVIOUS ONE.. is that incompetent...

[WhiteKnight77]

Obama stated that electing him would bring about change. Those that state he could not have done something on his own is mistaken. He could have shown leadership ability and that true change was taking place when each and every one of his nominations that failed to pay taxes would not allow them to take the respective office he was nominating them for starting with Timothy F. Geithner when he was nominated for Secretary of the Treasury. Had Obama nominated someone else early on and followed through (other office nominees did get replaced, one several times even) all of them, he could have shown that he was a true leader. Instead he showed that it would be business as usual.

Bearcat, the rhetoric from both sides is ridiculous. Both sides fail to see the faults each side has of their own. Both sides are at fault and both sides do not want to admit it.

[RAF_OldBuzzard]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bearcat99:

... many cowardly Democrats are more worried about getting reelected than doing what is good for the country.. ... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And they damned well better be worry abut being re-elected.

As for "the good for the country", that's a matter that's still up for debate. As it stands right now, the MAJORITY of the people in the country don't think obamacare IS what's "good for the country".

Congress Critters aren't put into their positions to act like our parents. There are there to do what we tell them to do. It's way past time that they, and a lot of the people that vote for them understand that.

[SterlingX]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by erco415:
No Sterling, a true leader doesn't dwell on the past- what good comes of it? It makes a leader look weak- better he should simply acknowledge the situation and tell us what he's going to do about it. Our President likes to do both... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Dwelling on the past would be to hate and blame the Germans for WW2, no good would come out of that because that past is over, unlike the present US downfall.

In the case of the present state of the USA, Obama's fault is exactly the opposite - pretending and acting as if it's all over and nothing happened, when it isn't. It's a disconnect from reality, as present, precisely because he has turned a blind eye to the past, thinking that this would get him reconciliation - it hasn't.
He has ignored events and decided to stay true to his promises (health care etc.), i.e. to get done what he has promised, rather than sort out the present - he has never promised to handle recession. Again, this is a disconnect from reality in the name of "change", meaning accomplishing campaign promises, unlike everyone else. This sort of change is, of course, idiotic, as it gains the meaning of "I will be different than the rest, it's a change because I'm different and I'm there", not "I will make things change".

And even when it comes to promises and health-care, he (or the dems) have managed to attempt one giant step for themselves, a small step for everyone else. The root of most health care evil is medical patents - if medical patents didn't exist, costs wouldn't be rising up forever and people would be doing medical research because they care, as it has always been in medicine (although this sure isn't the only thing that would reduce healthcare costs and make it more available). You can imagine the blowing of heads at GOP&Co if something like this had been proposed.

Business as usual means 'conservative', so, complaints about business as usual should automatically place you in the void to the left of Obama, not in the GOP camp or somewhere in between. If you want to be consistent, of course (and if you are there, then you haven't stated it explicitly).

[bun-bun195333]

The Democrats hold a 59% majority in both the House and Senate so "Republican Obstructionism" should be no problem. Obama's first year was wasted on big socialist projects that a most voters do not want.

In the words of Peggy Joseph, "It was the most memorable time of my life. I, I... It was a touching moment, because I never thought this day would ever happen. I won't have to worry about putting gas in my car. I won't have to worry about paying my mortgage. You know, if I help him he's gonna help me."

I agree with Peggy. My house is paid off and I drive a diesel truck, so after a year of Obama I don't have to worry about a mortgage or putting gas in my car. What I worry about is the tripling of federal dept since dumb ole incompetent Shrub left office.

[Gammelpreusse]

As far as I can judge this stuff about the healthcare reform. AFAIK the current system costs are running wild and out of control. It's not a sustianable system anymore, with many cost potentifiers coming into effect within the next decade. If nothing is done about it, the system will explode, AFAIK.

This is the basis upon most of europe looks at this debate and why there is so little understanding for the republican position.

It's like on a sinking ship, everyone off board and the reps go "only if the red safeboats are painted blue first!!"

[BoCfuss]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gammelpreusse:
As far as I can judge this stuff about the healthcare reform. AFAIK the current system costs are running wild and out of control. It's not a sustianable system anymore, with many cost potentifiers coming into effect within the next decade. If nothing is done about it, the system will explode, AFAIK.

This is the basis upon most of europe looks at this debate and why there is so little understanding for the republican position.

It's like on a sinking ship, everyone off board and the reps go "only if the red safeboats are painted blue first!!" </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agreed, something needs to be done to control the costs of health care. Raising taxes and having large fines seems to be one way of doing it. Hence the Tea Parties. There are other ways that are being ignored.

[Gammelpreusse]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BoCfuss:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gammelpreusse:
As far as I can judge this stuff about the healthcare reform. AFAIK the current system costs are running wild and out of control. It's not a sustianable system anymore, with many cost potentifiers coming into effect within the next decade. If nothing is done about it, the system will explode, AFAIK.

This is the basis upon most of europe looks at this debate and why there is so little understanding for the republican position.

It's like on a sinking ship, everyone off board and the reps go "only if the red safeboats are painted blue first!!" </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agreed, something needs to be done to control the costs of health care. Raising taxes and having large fines seems to be one way of doing it. Hence the Tea Parties. There are other ways that are being ignored. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And what is the difference to any other political approach there in the history of democracy?

[Bearcat99]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SterlingX:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by erco415:
No Sterling, a true leader doesn't dwell on the past- what good comes of it? It makes a leader look weak- better he should simply acknowledge the situation and tell us what he's going to do about it. Our President likes to do both... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Dwelling on the past would be to hate and blame the Germans for WW2, no good would come out of that because that past is over, unlike the present US downfall.

In the case of the present state of the USA, Obama's fault is exactly the opposite - pretending and acting as if it's all over and nothing happened, when it isn't. It's a disconnect from reality, as present, precisely because he has turned a blind eye to the past, thinking that this would get him reconciliation - it hasn't.
He has ignored events and decided to stay true to his promises (health care etc.), i.e. to get done what he has promised, rather than sort out the present - he has never promised to handle recession. Again, this is a disconnect from reality in the name of "change", meaning accomplishing campaign promises, unlike everyone else. This sort of change is, of course, idiotic, as it gains the meaning of "I will be different than the rest, it's a change because I'm different and I'm there", not "I will make things change".

And even when it comes to promises and health-care, he (or the dems) have managed to attempt one giant step for themselves, a small step for everyone else. The root of most health care evil is medical patents - if medical patents didn't exist, costs wouldn't be rising up forever and people would be doing medical research because they care, as it has always been in medicine (although this sure isn't the only thing that would reduce healthcare costs and make it more available). You can imagine the blowing of heads at GOP&Co if something like this had been proposed.

Business as usual means 'conservative', so, complaints about business as usual should automatically place you in the void to the left of Obama, not in the GOP camp or somewhere in between. If you want to be consistent, of course (and if you are there, then you haven't stated it explicitly). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

People think that this is about a campaign promise.. and it partially is.. but why do you think the promise was made? It was made because spiralling healthcare costs are directly linked to much of our economic woes... and I agree with you.. saying that pointing out the previous administrations role in all this is "dwelling on the past" is such BS... when in reality 2 years ago from today we were 7 years into the Bush administration .. and now this president is supposed to fix it all... in a year.. and is a failed leader because he hasn't... As I said there is nothing that he will ever do that will please his detractors other than loose the next election...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RAF_OldBuzzard:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bearcat99:

... many cowardly Democrats are more worried about getting reelected than doing what is good for the country.. ... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And they damned well better be worry abut being re-elected.
As for "the good for the country", that's a matter that's still up for debate. As it stands right now, the MAJORITY of the people in the country don't think obamacare IS what's "good for the country".
Congress Critters aren't put into their positions to act like our parents. There are there to do what we tell them to do. It's way past time that they, and a lot of the people that vote for them understand that. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well considering the incessant drone of negativity since the first ideas were being leaked.. and the fact that again... Fox is entertainment.. and many Americans prefer entertainment over news.. otherwise Fox would not be so popular.. because it surely isn't that "Fox is the only network that tells the American people the truth..." as many on Fox like to claim and many of their fans believe... The fact that it is still called "Obamacare" says a mouthful about why it is treated as it is. It isn't perfect... but it is better than what we have.. and all the lies told about it.. from the death panel lies.. to the bit about doctors being forced to perform abortions... to people being forced to adopt it... How many times does the president have to say... "If you are happy with your healthcare you can keep what you have and not change a thing... " but nope.... "Obamacare is going to ruin the country...

These notions are put out by insurance company stooges who don't want the change.... I have to go all around di(ks hatband just to get the proper medication for myself.. and get free samples every few weeks.. why? Because my insurance wont cover the stuff that works best with me... My wife has similar issues... then they say... "85% of Americans are perfectly happy with their healthcare... " Considering that the percentage of Americans without any health care is put at 1 in 6.. or around 15%.. that would mean that all Americans are happy with their health care.. which is BS... they may be happy that they have some kind of health care.. but most of the people I talk to , either at the Drs office, on the street.. on the job.. and on the internet.... have varying horror stories..

I have yet to listen to Fox News for any length of time.. and my wife is an avid fan of Fox.. so you can imagine the discussions we have.. but I have yet to hear anything positive about our current president friom that network.. even when he does a good thing.. it is either not mentioned at all.. or minimalized.. or they pull @sshats out of the woodwork to discredit whatever positive thing it is.. daily.... hourly.. You cant listen to Fox News for 60 minutes without some criticism of the current President.. 24/7... and people wonder why he is having a hard time getting things through... Our media outlets are controlled by corporate giants.. and now thanks to the unsupreme court.. those same corporate giants with almost infinitely deep pockets can now make unlimited contributions to political campaigns... so you can only imagine where the political process in this country is headed... and these same people... who criticized the administration's health plan because this could happen.. or that could happen.. not that it was in the legislation.. but it was possible... well most of them were asleep at the wheel on this decision.. and still are. So you guys keep on pointing fingers and thinking that no action is better than doing something... this is a pivotal moment in our nations history.. and if/when it slips by because too many people were suckered into the politics of fear and divisiveness rather than seeing what was really happening.. because of the boogie man in the white house.. the cries of how "ineffective" he was will be ringing for decades... h@ll some folks still talk about Carter..

[erco415]

"How many times does the president have to say... "If you are happy with your healthcare you can keep what you have and not change a thing... " but nope.... "


Oh really? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czHwNR0nAOQ&feature=player_embedded)

BC, you is wrong- Fox is as much a news station as any other.

Blaming Bush makes Obama look weak.

Think about Jim Schwartz, the coach of the Detroit Lions. If he were to come in and blame all of the Lions problems on what happened under the previous coach, even if that were true, how would he look as a leader?

The question I posed is simple- is the President failing the test of leadership? It's not about results, it's not about what others are doing, it's about how the man is conducting himself. I can point to specific examples where he falls short of the example of people whom I consider to have shown excellent leadership skills. You have people you look up to as leaders- how does he rate compared to them? Does he do the things that, to you, a strong leader does?

[Cajun76]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gammelpreusse:
As far as I can judge this stuff about the healthcare reform. AFAIK the current system costs are running wild and out of control. It's not a sustianable system anymore, with many cost potentifiers coming into effect within the next decade. If nothing is done about it, the system will explode, AFAIK.

This is the basis upon most of europe looks at this debate and why there is so little understanding for the republican position.

It's like on a sinking ship, everyone off board and the reps go "only if the red safeboats are painted blue first!!" </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The Dems have completely ignored the rising cost of healthcare, and have merely opted to force those who are already paying for it or that can and won't pay for it to cover everyone else. That is, unless you fall into one of their special interest groups like the unions. That's their "solution" It's not even European-style. It's good ole fashioned power-grab while throwing the financial burden on taxpayers, doctors and hospitals. Yep, their linchpin of "cost control" is drastically reducing payments to doctors and hospitals and taxing the high-premiums of those already struggling to pay for healthcare. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

You haven't heard the the Republican position because if the Dems can't get their corrupt agenda through, they scream "Obstruction!"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...AR2009112503607.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/25/AR2009112503607.html)

[Pirschjaeger]

From Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_w_bush#Post-presidency) .The below information refers to 2000 to 2008.

So, it goes from this.......

The poverty rate increased from 11.3% in 2000 to 12.3% in 2006 after peaking at 12.7% in 2004. By October 2008, due to increases in domestic and foreign spending, the national debt had risen to $11.3 trillion, an increase of over 100% from the start of the year 2000 when the debt was $5.6 trillion. By the end of Bush's presidency, unemployment climbed to 7.2%........

..........In November 2008, over 500,000 jobs were lost, which marked the largest loss of jobs in the United States in 34 years. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that in the last four months of 2008, 1.9 million jobs were lost. By the end of 2008, the U.S. had lost a total of 2.6 million jobs.

to this.................

http://s11.photobucket.com/albums/a198/FritzFranzen/America2000to2010.jpg
Bureau of Labor (http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?series_id=LNS14000000&data_tool=XGtable)

When I look at the above table I see that by the end of 2008 the unemployment rate soared 2.7% in just a year. Such an increase has a momentum. By the end of 2009 the rate of increase seems to be under control. Now in January it seems to be decreasing.

I really don't get what people are whining about. It appears the situation created by the former administration, which was obviously spiralling out of control is now being controlled by the current administration.

Perhaps these stimulus packages are starting to work?

[Cajun76]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pirschjaeger:
From Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_w_bush#Post-presidency) .The below information refers to 2000 to 2008.

So, it goes from this.......

The poverty rate increased from 11.3% in 2000 to 12.3% in 2006 after peaking at 12.7% in 2004. By October 2008, due to increases in domestic and foreign spending, the national debt had risen to $11.3 trillion, an increase of over 100% from the start of the year 2000 when the debt was $5.6 trillion. By the end of Bush's presidency, unemployment climbed to 7.2%........

..........In November 2008, over 500,000 jobs were lost, which marked the largest loss of jobs in the United States in 34 years. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that in the last four months of 2008, 1.9 million jobs were lost. By the end of 2008, the U.S. had lost a total of 2.6 million jobs.

to this.................

http://s11.photobucket.com/albums/a198/FritzFranzen/America2000to2010.jpg
Bureau of Labor (http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?series_id=LNS14000000&data_tool=XGtable)

When I look at the above table I see that by the end of 2008 the unemployment rate soared 2.7% in just a year. Such an increase has a momentum. By the end of 2009 the rate of increase seems to be under control. Now in January it seems to be decreasing.

I really don't get what people are whining about. It appears the situation created by the former administration, which was obviously spiralling out of control is now being controlled by the current administration.

Perhaps these stimulus packages are starting to work? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Which neatly shows the policies of Clinton catching up and and 2006-2008 Democratic led Congress did more to destroy the economy than anything else. Although the previous administration inherited a recession and had to deal with the economic problems caused by 9/11, the economy was strong through most of Bush's presidency. It started to slide once the Democrats got a majority and Bush played along hoping to win support for some of his stuff. (&lt;- here comes the shrill, uninformed shrieking) In true form, he gave, they took, and then the Democrats in Congress promptly sat on their @sses, complaining loudly.

Between cap and trade, tax increases and national care, the current Congress and president are poised to finish the pesky economy off. Then they can substitute their own, all while still blaming Bush.

"Never let a serious crisis go to waste. What I mean by that is it's an opportunity to do things you couldn't do before." - White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel

The stimulus was merely political kickback and close-to-the-heart pork projects cherished by the Democrats. In reality, many of these "social" programs are merely taxpayer-funded vote buying. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

http://online.wsj.com/article/...310466514522309.html (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123310466514522309.html)

[Ba5tard5word]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The question I posed is simple- is the President failing the test of leadership? It's not about results, it's not about what others are doing, it's about how the man is conducting himself. I can point to specific examples where he falls short of the example of people whom I consider to have shown excellent leadership skills. You have people you look up to as leaders- how does he rate compared to them? Does he do the things that, to you, a strong leader does? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Well you want to compare him to a football coach like Vince Lombardi from like 50 years ago so again I'm going to compare Obama to an actual fellow president from just over a year ago and again Obama is 10,000...no I'm going to retract that...a million times better than Bush.

[erco415]

Fair enough.

How does he compare to leaders you admire?

[Ba5tard5word]

well ok I'll bite http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


- FDR...well Obama hasn't put an entire race in internment camps yet so I'll give Obama this one. On the other hand he hasn't pwned the GOP four times in a row from a wheelchair.

- Bill Clinton: I don't think Obama is as charismatic as Clinton but I'm not sure it really matters. Obama hasn't had a sex scandal (yet) and he's pretty similar to Clinton in terms of issues faced so I'll give this one to Obama too.

- Teddy Roosevelt: Obama hasn't been shot while giving a speech and then continued to give the speech so I think I'll give TR this one.

- David Moyes: Obama hasn't started Landon Donovan and hasn't gotten into the finals of the FA cup yet so I think I will give Moyes this one. Give Obama time though and we shall see. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

[Bearcat99]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by erco415:
"How many times does the president have to say... "If you are happy with your healthcare you can keep what you have and not change a thing... " but nope.... "


Oh really? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czHwNR0nAOQ&feature=player_embedded)

BC, you is wrong- Fox is as much a news station as any other.

Blaming Bush makes Obama look weak.

Think about Jim Schwartz, the coach of the Detroit Lions. If he were to come in and blame all of the Lions problems on what happened under the previous coach, even if that were true, how would he look as a leader?

The question I posed is simple- is the President failing the test of leadership? It's not about results, it's not about what others are doing, it's about how the man is conducting himself. I can point to specific examples where he falls short of the example of people whom I consider to have shown excellent leadership skills. You have people you look up to as leaders- how does he rate compared to them? Does he do the things that, to you, a strong leader does? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

To compare a football team.. that can turn things around in a few years with the right draft picks and player acquisitions.. to a nation.. that is tied to a global economy and has far more variables and far greater impact on millins of lives is like comparing apples to lug nuts.

[erco415]

Didn't like the video?

A closer reading of my post would reveal that I did not compare the USA to a football team. What I did do was ask you how you would view a leader, in this case a football coach, who got up in front of the cameras and blamed someone else for his current problems, even if he was absolutely correct as to the fact that the problems existed when he arrived.

I also asked you how the President compares to other leaders you hold in high regard.

I did not say that the President doesn't have difficult issues to address, nor did I say that what's going on is his fault. I am asking about your opinion as to the nature of the man's response to the demands of leadership.

[Ba5tard5word]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">in this case a football coach, who got up in front of the cameras and blamed someone else for his current problems </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In the case of the 49'ers or Raiders I would not begrudge the guy.

[erco415]

Completely in agreement about the Raiders. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Have the 'Niners gotten that bad, then?

[Ba5tard5word]

Well I'm not a big NFL follower but yeah the 49'ers really do kinda stink. They actually had an ok season this year after several terrible ones and got a couple good wins, but then got into the mode of losing every single game again.

[Bearcat99]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by erco415:
Didn't like the video?

A closer reading of my post would reveal that I did not compare the USA to a football team. What I did do was ask you how you would view a leader, in this case a football coach, who got up in front of the cameras and blamed someone else for his current problems, even if he was absolutely correct as to the fact that the problems existed when he arrived.

I also asked you how the President compares to other leaders you hold in high regard.

I did not say that the President doesn't have difficult issues to address, nor did I say that what's going on is his fault. I am asking about your opinion as to the nature of the man's response to the demands of leadership. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think the man is doing the best he can... For me the jury is still out.. I think that this country is in for a rough ride regardless.. We have elected officials who hinge a lot fo what they do on polls.... and the bad thing about polls is... polls are just based on opinion.. not fact.. and we know that most Americans ..... are not very well informed... YOU may be.. leit is.. and many of the folks who post here.. on both sides of the issue at least have done some research to back up their claims beyond the sound bytes... but most Americans do not do that... As a nation we are woefully misinformed about what is going on not only here but in the world... I can get more from Al Jazzera English (which surprised me.. because i was expecting a lot of pro Arab/Palestinian propaganda..but what I got was some well done international news...), the BBC AND CNN, CSPAN,MSNBC, and yes even Fox than I can from either source alone.. yet many MANY Americans will only look at one source... that is like trying to get a good idea of what is going on outside your house from the inside.. but looking through one window... You wont get a full view... but many Americans think that they can do that... and politicians govern by the polls... largely... One of the things I like about our current President is that he seems to not pay so much attention to the polls.. doing what he believes is right rather than what political expediency or polls dictate... to me that is a mark of a leader. But that's me.. maybe my standards are just skewed... I think that leaders lead.. or do their best to.. whether what they are doing is popular or not..

[Cajun76]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ba5tard5word:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The question I posed is simple- is the President failing the test of leadership? It's not about results, it's not about what others are doing, it's about how the man is conducting himself. I can point to specific examples where he falls short of the example of people whom I consider to have shown excellent leadership skills. You have people you look up to as leaders- how does he rate compared to them? Does he do the things that, to you, a strong leader does? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Well you want to compare him to a football coach like Vince Lombardi from like 50 years ago so again I'm going to compare Obama to an actual fellow president from just over a year ago and again Obama is 10,000...no I'm going to retract that...a million times better than Bush. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITI...ush-obama/index.html (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/13/wall.bush-obama/index.html)

But Obama *is* much better than Bush.

Obama is better at raising taxes for everyone. Oops, we're not supposed to call them taxes...

Obama is better at raising the deficit to unprecedented levels.

Obama has extended key Patriot Act provisions.

Obama is better at trying unilaterally consolidate key domestic programs like health and energy at the expense of jobs and peoples right to choose.

Obama is better at sitting in the unions pocket and other special interest.

Obama is better at making the intelligence community second guess themselves and wonder if the president supports their efforts. Big assist from Nancy Pelosi.

Obama is better at holding prisoners in Guantanamo Bay. They are *still* there, even after he said he'd close it.

Obama has slowed the withdrawal in Iraq and surged in Afghanistan, and expanded drone strikes in Pakistan.

Obama is better at taking advantage peoples fears about the economy.

A million times better? He's not *that* bad...

[Ba5tard5word]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Obama is better at raising taxes for everyone. Oops, we're not supposed to call them taxes... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Obama gave 95% of Americans a tax cut, one of the biggest tax cuts in history, and you know it, you guys just don't care because he didn't give massive tax cuts to the rich. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Obama has extended key Patriot Act provisions.

Obama is better at holding prisoners in Guantanamo Bay. They are *still* there, even after he said he'd close it.

Obama has slowed the withdrawal in Iraq and surged in Afghanistan, and expanded drone strikes in Pakistan. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well I take it you guys will start supporting him if he's such a Republican then.

[LEBillfish]

To all those complaining, prove how much it means to you.....do something about it.

One person can change the world.....yet not from a forum. All this whining about how bad President Obama is (oddly starting even before he took office saying a LOT about its validity)....Never the less, do something.

Have any of you contacted your congressmen and senators? What about local news? Heck, have any of you even made up a cardboard sign and stood at an intersection?

Till you do.....Means it's not that bad, just something to bi*ch about.

K2

[Airmail109]

To the Sourthern States, you know you want to sescede and rejoin the crown. Everything falls apart when the British arn't running the show! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

[WhiteKnight77]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEBillfish:
To all those complaining, prove how much it means to you.....do something about it.

One person can change the world.....yet not from a forum. All this whining about how bad President Obama is (oddly starting even before he took office saying a LOT about its validity)....Never the less, do something.

Have any of you contacted your congressmen and senators? What about local news? Heck, have any of you even made up a cardboard sign and stood at an intersection?

Till you do.....Means it's not that bad, just something to bi*ch about.

K2 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


The same started for President Bush, even before he was originally elected to the office.

I have written to my Senators and Congressman several times. The trouble is, I got redistricted into someone's Congressional district that I didn't vote for and no longer have the one I did vote for as my representative. The one I currently have likes to feed the welfare mentality of many in the district.

[Bremspropeller]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">even before he was originally elected to the office. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Was he? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

[LW_lcarp]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ba5tard5word:

Obama gave 95% of Americans a tax cut, one of the biggest tax cuts in history, and you know it, you guys just don't care because he didn't give massive tax cuts to the rich. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Its funny you mentioned the tax cuts he gave us. I did my taxes yesterday and that nice "tax cut" he gave us, there is a line on the 1040 subtracting that "tax cut" from my refund. And whats even funnier I was layed off 8 months last year so I didnt even get all of that "tax cut" but I sure had to pay it back.

[Bremspropeller]

Congrats, you're rich, then http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

[GoToAway]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Aimail101:
To the Sourthern States, you know you want to sescede and rejoin the crown. Everything falls apart when the British arn't running the show! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>You want them? Take them.
Have fun when they decide they want to put Palin in Parliament. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

[Cajun76]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GoToAway:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Aimail101:
To the Sourthern States, you know you want to sescede and rejoin the crown. Everything falls apart when the British arn't running the show! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE> <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">You want them? Take them.</span>
Have fun when they decide they want to put Palin in Parliament. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I suppose that would get rid of many of the black people that people like you don't like... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

[Bremspropeller]

Flawed logic 101

[GoToAway]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Cajun76:
I suppose that would get rid of many of the black people that people like you don't like... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>No, it would just get rid of reactionary fundies like you that can't take a joke. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

In any case, I'll just add "racist" to the list of unfounded things you've accused me of being lately. That would be #3 after "Nazi" and "person who hates handicapped people." What's next? Murderer? Child molester? Terrorist? I'm excited to find out.

[blairgowrie]

Come on guys. Let's cut out the insults please.

[barfo1983]

GoToAway

Posted Sun February 07 2010 10:22 Hide Post

quote:
Originally posted by Aimail101:
To the Sourthern States, you know you want to sescede and rejoin the crown. Everything falls apart when the British arn't running the show! Surprised

You want them? Take them.
Have fun when they decide they want to put Palin in Parliament. Razz


Right on queue

[SterlingX]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GoToAway:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Aimail101:
To the Sourthern States, you know you want to sescede and rejoin the crown. Everything falls apart when the British arn't running the show! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>You want them? Take them.
Have fun when they decide they want to put Palin in Parliament. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

/raises hand/
Ten dollars! 7K and ten dollars, if you include Palin in the package!

[falling-bird]

Yeah, we'll take 'em back.

Tax - of course, dear boys

Parliament? - Representation?

I think not

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

[R_Target]

Come on over. I'm sure you guys can find your way to Yorktown.

http://i47.tinypic.com/2i9t2ja.jpg

[Low_Flyer_MkIX]

The French won't bail you out this time. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

[R_Target]

That's OK. The USN has come a long way since 1781. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

[Low_Flyer_MkIX]

So's the RN...

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2329/2177048447_2643686bab.jpg

http://media.ubi.com/us/forum_images/gf-glomp.gif

[R_Target]

!

http://scrapetv.com/News/News%20Pages/usa/Images/mchales-navy.jpg

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[barfo1983]

Now THOSE two posts were the funniest I've seen on here for awhile http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[barfo1983]

Does the RN have anyone like Lt Wilson?

Raquel Welch in only her third role. Most talented!

http://vids.myspace.com/index....ual&VideoID=46452632 (http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&VideoID=46452632)

[bun-bun195333]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Low_Flyer_MkIX:
So's the RN...

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2329/2177048447_2643686bab.jpg

http://media.ubi.com/us/forum_images/gf-glomp.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Red vs Blue / Why Are We Here? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BAM9fgV-ts)