Just curious?
Before 2007 Democrat controlling the congresses, it is Bush Faults and after Obama won in 2008, it is STILL Bush's Fault??How did Democrats and Obama go 55 and 31 months in office without making a single mistake?"Mistake" implies an unintended outcome. We can only assume that they intended this as the outcome.How did Democrats and Obama go 55 and 31 months in office without making a single mistake?
Obama has made many mistakes starting with his surrender on health care and making most of the stimulus tax cuts which are the worst way to stimulate the economy. He failed to prosecute the bankers that caused and profited from the financial crises then didn't really reform the banking industry. It can and will all happen again. Should I go on because there are many more mistakes he has made.How did Democrats and Obama go 55 and 31 months in office without making a single mistake?Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery Samm
Thanks.
GWBush did start some problems that Republicans have obstructed and filibustered the fixing of since. Only Obamas first year was a super majority in the House.How did Democrats and Obama go 55 and 31 months in office without making a single mistake?This question was posted by another individual because Bush couldn't think of a single mistake, remember?
Unlinke Bush, Obama has not said he hasn't made mistakes. FAIL.How did Democrats and Obama go 55 and 31 months in office without making a single mistake?
Before 2007 yes it was Bush faults obviously.
After 2008....first few months it was accurate to blame Bush. Not anymore.
It's Bush fault! It's always someone else's fault....How did Democrats and Obama go 55 and 31 months in office without making a single mistake?
Yes, because of the polices signed into law by Bush. Bank deregulations, cheap credit laws, bush tax cuts, etc..
Everything is Bush's fault. That way they always win you see?
hell ya, all bush did was f up our nation and now obamas fixing it and republicans don't like that!
I agree its Bush's fault.
He is the messiah...haven't you heard?
Monday, January 30, 2012
Is it wrong for Obama to shoot old people into the sun to fight global warming?
Did you know that at page 425, Obama's health care reform bill requires that all old people over the age of 65 must be strapped onto a rocket and fired into the sun?
It is all part of his plan to stop global warming...
Do you think this wrong?Is it wrong for Obama to shoot old people into the sun to fight global warming?OMG! I heard this on Fox News too!!!Is it wrong for Obama to shoot old people into the sun to fight global warming?
It really depends on who they fire into the sun - if they did Rupert Murdoch it would certainly make a lot of people happy still curious I checked the page and it says
Page 425:
"(FF) advance care planning consultation (as defined in subsection (hhh)(1));"; and
(B) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
"Advance Care Planning Consultation
"(hhh)(1) Subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), the term 鈥榓dvance care planning consultation鈥?means a consultation between the individual and a practitioner described in paragraph (2) regarding advance care planning, if, subject to paragraph (3), the individual involved has not had such a consultation within the last 5 years. Such consultation shall include the following:
"(A) An explanation by the practitioner of advance care planning, including key questions and considerations, important steps, and suggested people to talk to.
"(B) An explanation by the practitioner of advance directives, including living wills and durable powers of attorney, and their uses.
"(C) An explanation by the practitioner of the role and responsibilities of a health care proxy.
"(D) The provision by the practitioner of a list of national and State-specific resources to assist consumers and their families with advance care planning, including the national toll-free hotline,
It doesn't mention that part there, could you have been reading certain rather biased sites perhaps?Is it wrong for Obama to shoot old people into the sun to fight global warming?Sure, its wrong, hes got it all wrong, we need to shoot the young people into the sun to fight global warming, older people have more gas and would only explode on contact with the sun sending up more solar flares that would impact on the longevity of lobsters and ruining the shrimping on the Louisiana coast.
Whereas the younger people are more tender and would just get nicely barbecued, which wouldn't impact the ice shelf at all, although the older people left might want to enjoy a nice church picnic on Sunday and not know why the ribs were the first things to go.
Well, I think you are wrong. On page 426, it specifically says only elderly republicans will be allowed to be strapped to the rockets. Keep trying to read.Is it wrong for Obama to shoot old people into the sun to fight global warming?It's too energy inefficient.
I like the clause immediately following, where if you turn in an old person who's a drain on the system, you get paid a bounty.
It's called, "Cash For Clunkers".Is it wrong for Obama to shoot old people into the sun to fight global warming?
Indeed! And let's not forget page 443, where Obama will personally throw all newborn babies into pools of acid and use the tears of their weeping mothers to flavor his coffee! FACT!
YES, THAT WOULD BE WRONG.
IT TAKES WAY TOO MUCH ENERGY TO LIFT A HUMAN OUT OF EARTH'S GRAVITY WELL.
OUR ECOSYSTEM WILL GET BAD ENOUGH THAT WE WILL EVENTUALLY HAVE TO CONVERT THEM INTO GREEN WAFERS.Is it wrong for Obama to shoot old people into the sun to fight global warming?
dude that's only on the house bill. the senate one is completely different AND after the senate passes a bill, they need to pass a third
Surely you can't be this stupid
Congress and any former President whose last name begins with the letter "O" are exempt from this provision, of course.
yes but on page 3589 paragraph 33 he doesnt fire them into the sun. he uses them for fertilizer.
No it may be entertaining to watch, after they are condemned during the death panels.
LOL.........
2 points...swish
sarah palin is that you
no, it is perfectly fine
another conservative showing their intelligence.*
I see that not many here have a sense of humor- they think you really think it says this
When we could be turning them into nutritious Soylent Green? What a waste.
Probably beats being sent out on an ice floe
huh??? I really wish that no child left behind act was never passed.
I think you need to read the bill and stop making fun of people who have read it.
It is all part of his plan to stop global warming...
Do you think this wrong?Is it wrong for Obama to shoot old people into the sun to fight global warming?OMG! I heard this on Fox News too!!!Is it wrong for Obama to shoot old people into the sun to fight global warming?
It really depends on who they fire into the sun - if they did Rupert Murdoch it would certainly make a lot of people happy still curious I checked the page and it says
Page 425:
"(FF) advance care planning consultation (as defined in subsection (hhh)(1));"; and
(B) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
"Advance Care Planning Consultation
"(hhh)(1) Subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), the term 鈥榓dvance care planning consultation鈥?means a consultation between the individual and a practitioner described in paragraph (2) regarding advance care planning, if, subject to paragraph (3), the individual involved has not had such a consultation within the last 5 years. Such consultation shall include the following:
"(A) An explanation by the practitioner of advance care planning, including key questions and considerations, important steps, and suggested people to talk to.
"(B) An explanation by the practitioner of advance directives, including living wills and durable powers of attorney, and their uses.
"(C) An explanation by the practitioner of the role and responsibilities of a health care proxy.
"(D) The provision by the practitioner of a list of national and State-specific resources to assist consumers and their families with advance care planning, including the national toll-free hotline,
It doesn't mention that part there, could you have been reading certain rather biased sites perhaps?Is it wrong for Obama to shoot old people into the sun to fight global warming?Sure, its wrong, hes got it all wrong, we need to shoot the young people into the sun to fight global warming, older people have more gas and would only explode on contact with the sun sending up more solar flares that would impact on the longevity of lobsters and ruining the shrimping on the Louisiana coast.
Whereas the younger people are more tender and would just get nicely barbecued, which wouldn't impact the ice shelf at all, although the older people left might want to enjoy a nice church picnic on Sunday and not know why the ribs were the first things to go.
Well, I think you are wrong. On page 426, it specifically says only elderly republicans will be allowed to be strapped to the rockets. Keep trying to read.Is it wrong for Obama to shoot old people into the sun to fight global warming?It's too energy inefficient.
I like the clause immediately following, where if you turn in an old person who's a drain on the system, you get paid a bounty.
It's called, "Cash For Clunkers".Is it wrong for Obama to shoot old people into the sun to fight global warming?
Indeed! And let's not forget page 443, where Obama will personally throw all newborn babies into pools of acid and use the tears of their weeping mothers to flavor his coffee! FACT!
YES, THAT WOULD BE WRONG.
IT TAKES WAY TOO MUCH ENERGY TO LIFT A HUMAN OUT OF EARTH'S GRAVITY WELL.
OUR ECOSYSTEM WILL GET BAD ENOUGH THAT WE WILL EVENTUALLY HAVE TO CONVERT THEM INTO GREEN WAFERS.Is it wrong for Obama to shoot old people into the sun to fight global warming?
dude that's only on the house bill. the senate one is completely different AND after the senate passes a bill, they need to pass a third
Surely you can't be this stupid
Congress and any former President whose last name begins with the letter "O" are exempt from this provision, of course.
yes but on page 3589 paragraph 33 he doesnt fire them into the sun. he uses them for fertilizer.
No it may be entertaining to watch, after they are condemned during the death panels.
LOL.........
2 points...swish
sarah palin is that you
no, it is perfectly fine
another conservative showing their intelligence.*
I see that not many here have a sense of humor- they think you really think it says this
When we could be turning them into nutritious Soylent Green? What a waste.
Probably beats being sent out on an ice floe
huh??? I really wish that no child left behind act was never passed.
I think you need to read the bill and stop making fun of people who have read it.
How is it that Obama inherited a failing stock market from Bush ?
The facts clearly show the stock market on a steady climb from 2004 - 2008 until the election of Obama. The facts also show the market climbing from Bush's election in 2001 until it dropped after 9/11. The numbers just don't lie folks.How is it that Obama inherited a failing stock market from Bush ?\The market peaked in October 2007 and “came tumbling down last spring, when the bursting of the housing bubble started to add up to massive losses for Wall Street banks and other financial services firms tied to bad mortgages.”
after the public found out that Bush and the G O P's deregulation of EVERYTHING caused false values and NOTHING is worth what THEY PROJECTED
of course confidence is OUT and people don't want stocks in companies that LIED about their profitability while paying their CEO multi-million dollar bonus's-----DUHHow is it that Obama inherited a failing stock market from Bush ?
Figures don't lie but liars figure.How is it that Obama inherited a failing stock market from Bush ?When Obama speaks the market shrieks.
Just look at the market drops on days he has given speech's, it is only obvious, so now he is sending Bernanke to do the dirty work with the same results.
The market and the mortgage crisis have nothing to do with any Republican deregulation, it is Democrat Bill Clinton that revised the Community Reinvestment Act, to promote loans to unqualified people, in the name of "Affordable Housing".
Amen!
The stock market took a hit when the DEMOCRATIC polices of forcing banks to loan money to idiots finally reached it's maximum.
They planned it so that it would hit right before election time so that people would get scared and vote for "change." They just weren't smart enough to realize that sometimes change makes things much worse.
.How is it that Obama inherited a failing stock market from Bush ?Bush's irresponsible policies caused the lending bubble.How is it that Obama inherited a failing stock market from Bush ?
hmm, maybe because there is a RECESSION going on around the world! some people just don't get it. he inherited a lot of Bush's problems but the stock market one was going to happen, even if Bush still had time in office. just because you don't like Obama doesn't mean he's doing anything wrong.
Oh sure. One man has the power to make millions of people dump billions of dollars in investments after only being in office for a couple months. I'm sure the 8 years of economic disaster left behind by Bush had NOTHING to do with this.
Idiot.How is it that Obama inherited a failing stock market from Bush ?
So...the facts clearly show that?
In November 2007 the Dow was at about 14,000.
In November 2008 the Dow was at about 8,000.
I guess you were confused about what a fact is.
Earnings!
I personally think the stock drops were partially because of the problems that hit hard at the end of the Bush Administration, things like Fannie and Freddie...but I also think the people with money who own businesses saw Obama's election win as now a shot at them. Now the wealthy/business owners don't have the power anymore, so they're pulling back, pulling out, pulling away.
Of course stocks will go down if those with money believe their leaders are against them.
When the democratic party gained Control over Congress in January 2007.
The Dow Jones was at 12,500 and rising
Unemployment was at 4.9% and falling
Since the Democrats became the majority party in Congress.
The Dow Jones has fallen 48%
Unemployment has increased 65%
Since the Democratic Party gained control of Congress in 2007
There have been 3.4 trillion dollars of deficit spending.
More than every Republican majority Congress combined since WW ll
But they wanna blame it on Bush or republicans !!!
And just what deregulation under Bush ?
Democrats keep saying Bush deregulation is the cause.
But for some reason, they can never name a single deregulation bill passed while Bush was president.
The purpose of the "Bail Out" for the banks was to get them to lend more. Its pretty funny that all the banks that got the money actually ended up lending less. And we bailed out GM and now they are saying they are going to go bankrupt anyway. Its awesome that my taxes are going to failure companies and irresponsible people that took on mortgages that they couldn't afford. But hey its "The Land of Opportunity" especially if you are a failure!!!!
Exactly the stock market started to fall when obama was elected, because the spell was broken and the people realized how screwed we were going to be. After he was elected any idiot realized how inexperience he was, and still is, and with whatever experience he does have he has never made any real decisions. I'm not saying that the economy wasn't pretty funky before he was elected, but after he was elected it dropped like a rock, and it's still going.
catch up on your obamanomics 3 simple phases
phase 1 ... explains how its bush's fault
http://obamapwns.com
He didn't. He inherited it from the Clinton and the Democrats.apa 6th edition forza motorsport 3
after the public found out that Bush and the G O P's deregulation of EVERYTHING caused false values and NOTHING is worth what THEY PROJECTED
of course confidence is OUT and people don't want stocks in companies that LIED about their profitability while paying their CEO multi-million dollar bonus's-----DUHHow is it that Obama inherited a failing stock market from Bush ?
Figures don't lie but liars figure.How is it that Obama inherited a failing stock market from Bush ?When Obama speaks the market shrieks.
Just look at the market drops on days he has given speech's, it is only obvious, so now he is sending Bernanke to do the dirty work with the same results.
The market and the mortgage crisis have nothing to do with any Republican deregulation, it is Democrat Bill Clinton that revised the Community Reinvestment Act, to promote loans to unqualified people, in the name of "Affordable Housing".
Amen!
The stock market took a hit when the DEMOCRATIC polices of forcing banks to loan money to idiots finally reached it's maximum.
They planned it so that it would hit right before election time so that people would get scared and vote for "change." They just weren't smart enough to realize that sometimes change makes things much worse.
.How is it that Obama inherited a failing stock market from Bush ?Bush's irresponsible policies caused the lending bubble.How is it that Obama inherited a failing stock market from Bush ?
hmm, maybe because there is a RECESSION going on around the world! some people just don't get it. he inherited a lot of Bush's problems but the stock market one was going to happen, even if Bush still had time in office. just because you don't like Obama doesn't mean he's doing anything wrong.
Oh sure. One man has the power to make millions of people dump billions of dollars in investments after only being in office for a couple months. I'm sure the 8 years of economic disaster left behind by Bush had NOTHING to do with this.
Idiot.How is it that Obama inherited a failing stock market from Bush ?
So...the facts clearly show that?
In November 2007 the Dow was at about 14,000.
In November 2008 the Dow was at about 8,000.
I guess you were confused about what a fact is.
Earnings!
I personally think the stock drops were partially because of the problems that hit hard at the end of the Bush Administration, things like Fannie and Freddie...but I also think the people with money who own businesses saw Obama's election win as now a shot at them. Now the wealthy/business owners don't have the power anymore, so they're pulling back, pulling out, pulling away.
Of course stocks will go down if those with money believe their leaders are against them.
When the democratic party gained Control over Congress in January 2007.
The Dow Jones was at 12,500 and rising
Unemployment was at 4.9% and falling
Since the Democrats became the majority party in Congress.
The Dow Jones has fallen 48%
Unemployment has increased 65%
Since the Democratic Party gained control of Congress in 2007
There have been 3.4 trillion dollars of deficit spending.
More than every Republican majority Congress combined since WW ll
But they wanna blame it on Bush or republicans !!!
And just what deregulation under Bush ?
Democrats keep saying Bush deregulation is the cause.
But for some reason, they can never name a single deregulation bill passed while Bush was president.
The purpose of the "Bail Out" for the banks was to get them to lend more. Its pretty funny that all the banks that got the money actually ended up lending less. And we bailed out GM and now they are saying they are going to go bankrupt anyway. Its awesome that my taxes are going to failure companies and irresponsible people that took on mortgages that they couldn't afford. But hey its "The Land of Opportunity" especially if you are a failure!!!!
Exactly the stock market started to fall when obama was elected, because the spell was broken and the people realized how screwed we were going to be. After he was elected any idiot realized how inexperience he was, and still is, and with whatever experience he does have he has never made any real decisions. I'm not saying that the economy wasn't pretty funky before he was elected, but after he was elected it dropped like a rock, and it's still going.
catch up on your obamanomics 3 simple phases
phase 1 ... explains how its bush's fault
http://obamapwns.com
He didn't. He inherited it from the Clinton and the Democrats.
Since Obama is deciding to ramp up the war in Afghanistan will Liberals still call this Bush's war?
Obama said before the election he thought we should put more resources into Afghanistan and that's what he is doing.
When does this become Obama's war instead of Bush's?|||It will be Obama's if the U.S. is victorious.|||If Bush had finished this war in a reasonable timeframe, Obama wouldn't have to be ramping it up to finish it off.
FDR took out Hitler and Hirohito in less than 4 years.
What is Bush's excuse for failing to finish a war against a bunch of rag-tag, untrained extremists?|||You know what? Amazingly I see a lot of them saying it is Obama's war now and he is taking a lot of **** from a lot of people. I am pleasantly surprised...
ADD: LOL! But I guess we will always have people like "idiot" above me|||yes they will ALWAYS call it bush's war.|||Hey, if it isn't Bush's war, it really isn't war at all.|||i say its obama's war now.|||No, though he'll always have the ignominious honor of having started it. It became Obama's war the moment he stepped into office, as did the Iraq war. If Obama does something egregiously wrong in either one, it's his fault, not Bush's.|||Who the hell knows anymore? I think they ought to pull out of Afghanistan and let those people fend for themselves. If they can't take care of themselves then it's their problem.|||When Obama starts a war. It is like blaming the tow truck guy for a car accident when somebody else was behind the wheel that hit the car.|||No. The war in Iraq was "Bush's War." The war in Afghanistan is to crush the terrorists who attacked us. It's a justified fight, not somebody's pet project.|||Before Obama became the President of U.S it was in ruins because of Bush now Obama is trying to fix everything and in my point of view I think he's doing the right thing.|||BOZO isn't responsible for anything...don't you know that by now? THREE YEARS OF DEM CONTROL and they have nothing to do with anything except making things a HUGE MESS and TELLING over 500 days of LIES!
DEMS VOTED FOR BOTH WARS...
You need to read the Iraq war resolution.
It lists all the reasons we had to go to war.
both houses of congress passed this bill authorizing the war.
It had overwhelming bipartisan support Democrat and Republican.
Source(s):
http://uspolitics.about.com/od/wariniraq鈥?/a>|||Liberals and neocons are the exact same thing. The only difference is that one of them wants guys to marry each other. That really is it. They both want the world to be under one government. They are huge fans of globalization and wont' stop until everyone is just like "us."
Liberals will still continue to blame Bush for this war.|||yes.|||Bush started them; so, it is and will always be his wars...it's really that simple. When Obama starts a war, you can cry then but don't hold your breath. Just because the guy you voted for FAILED in his mission to exact justice for 9/11, that failure doesn't magically transfer over to the next guy...Obama is simply trying to succeed at finishing what Bush failed at when he started it.|||just iraq|||I think this issue will separate the true liberals from the it's a college fad thing to be liberal. If you are truly a liberal you should be up in arms about the troop increase. Waiting to see how many truly believe in their ideals or in some super star politician.|||Bush's war was Iraq, America's war was in Afghanistan. Bush gets credit for right after 9/11, when he took us here and started to do the best thing for our nation.... but that whole "side tracked" in Iraq bit hurt us in Afghanistan.... now we are playing catch-up. It's not Obama's war, and it wasn't Bush's war... Going after Al Qaeda was/is America's war.|||The war in Afghanistan became President Obama's war the day in January 2009 that he was inaugurated. It is his inheritance and as commander in chief, he has to do all in his powers to continue to protect the lives and interests of America. It now become his call to provide for and support the troops. If "victory" comes in the next couple years, it will be President Obama's victory, not former President Bush's. Likewise, defeat is President Obama's, not former President Bush's.|||NO
it will BE OBAMA WIN
GOP CLOWN
ha hahahahhahah
after a large army sieges the taliban in pakistan
NOT IRAQ
ha hahahhahahahahahahahhahahah|||Iraq was always called Bush's war, Afghanistan has always been overlooked obviously. Majority of our troops were sent to Iraq. No one ever talked about Afghanistan until recently it was always Iraq.|||Liberals are stuck in the past. They don't have the confidence to look into the future. Whenever they can't think of something good, they look for someone to blame and spend more money that has nothign to do with the situation.|||It is still a bush war.With an Obama twist. Had it been done right to begin with we wouldn't be having this discussion. That lies completely at the door of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rove. Deny, deflect, distort, delude as much as you please. It still is what it is.|||Bush's war is in Iraq. Afghanistan is America's war but only patriotic Americans seem to know this.|||Bush started in 2001.
Obama has been cleaning up since 2009.
You do the math.|||It should have been Bush's war. He never should have abandoned the effort in Afghanistan to start a war of convenience. So no, Afghanistan is not Bush's war and hasn't been since 2003. And by the way, liberals have NEVER called Afghanistan Bush's war so not sure where you came up with that.|||No, even those far left anchors on MSNBC are now calling this 0bama's war.|||This is our children's future tax payments War.
Remember this is all debt, all the time.
Hard to tell the difference between someone who starts something, and someone who continues it who knows better.|||If you voted for Obama, and you're honest with yourself, you should be furious right about now.|||If we clean out Afghanistan and be successful then it will be Obama's war. If we get our rear ends handed to us then it will be Bush's war.|||Let's just hope it isn't the next Presidents war.
When does this become Obama's war instead of Bush's?|||It will be Obama's if the U.S. is victorious.|||If Bush had finished this war in a reasonable timeframe, Obama wouldn't have to be ramping it up to finish it off.
FDR took out Hitler and Hirohito in less than 4 years.
What is Bush's excuse for failing to finish a war against a bunch of rag-tag, untrained extremists?|||You know what? Amazingly I see a lot of them saying it is Obama's war now and he is taking a lot of **** from a lot of people. I am pleasantly surprised...
ADD: LOL! But I guess we will always have people like "idiot" above me|||yes they will ALWAYS call it bush's war.|||Hey, if it isn't Bush's war, it really isn't war at all.|||i say its obama's war now.|||No, though he'll always have the ignominious honor of having started it. It became Obama's war the moment he stepped into office, as did the Iraq war. If Obama does something egregiously wrong in either one, it's his fault, not Bush's.|||Who the hell knows anymore? I think they ought to pull out of Afghanistan and let those people fend for themselves. If they can't take care of themselves then it's their problem.|||When Obama starts a war. It is like blaming the tow truck guy for a car accident when somebody else was behind the wheel that hit the car.|||No. The war in Iraq was "Bush's War." The war in Afghanistan is to crush the terrorists who attacked us. It's a justified fight, not somebody's pet project.|||Before Obama became the President of U.S it was in ruins because of Bush now Obama is trying to fix everything and in my point of view I think he's doing the right thing.|||BOZO isn't responsible for anything...don't you know that by now? THREE YEARS OF DEM CONTROL and they have nothing to do with anything except making things a HUGE MESS and TELLING over 500 days of LIES!
DEMS VOTED FOR BOTH WARS...
You need to read the Iraq war resolution.
It lists all the reasons we had to go to war.
both houses of congress passed this bill authorizing the war.
It had overwhelming bipartisan support Democrat and Republican.
Source(s):
http://uspolitics.about.com/od/wariniraq鈥?/a>|||Liberals and neocons are the exact same thing. The only difference is that one of them wants guys to marry each other. That really is it. They both want the world to be under one government. They are huge fans of globalization and wont' stop until everyone is just like "us."
Liberals will still continue to blame Bush for this war.|||yes.|||Bush started them; so, it is and will always be his wars...it's really that simple. When Obama starts a war, you can cry then but don't hold your breath. Just because the guy you voted for FAILED in his mission to exact justice for 9/11, that failure doesn't magically transfer over to the next guy...Obama is simply trying to succeed at finishing what Bush failed at when he started it.|||just iraq|||I think this issue will separate the true liberals from the it's a college fad thing to be liberal. If you are truly a liberal you should be up in arms about the troop increase. Waiting to see how many truly believe in their ideals or in some super star politician.|||Bush's war was Iraq, America's war was in Afghanistan. Bush gets credit for right after 9/11, when he took us here and started to do the best thing for our nation.... but that whole "side tracked" in Iraq bit hurt us in Afghanistan.... now we are playing catch-up. It's not Obama's war, and it wasn't Bush's war... Going after Al Qaeda was/is America's war.|||The war in Afghanistan became President Obama's war the day in January 2009 that he was inaugurated. It is his inheritance and as commander in chief, he has to do all in his powers to continue to protect the lives and interests of America. It now become his call to provide for and support the troops. If "victory" comes in the next couple years, it will be President Obama's victory, not former President Bush's. Likewise, defeat is President Obama's, not former President Bush's.|||NO
it will BE OBAMA WIN
GOP CLOWN
ha hahahahhahah
after a large army sieges the taliban in pakistan
NOT IRAQ
ha hahahhahahahahahahahhahahah|||Iraq was always called Bush's war, Afghanistan has always been overlooked obviously. Majority of our troops were sent to Iraq. No one ever talked about Afghanistan until recently it was always Iraq.|||Liberals are stuck in the past. They don't have the confidence to look into the future. Whenever they can't think of something good, they look for someone to blame and spend more money that has nothign to do with the situation.|||It is still a bush war.With an Obama twist. Had it been done right to begin with we wouldn't be having this discussion. That lies completely at the door of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rove. Deny, deflect, distort, delude as much as you please. It still is what it is.|||Bush's war is in Iraq. Afghanistan is America's war but only patriotic Americans seem to know this.|||Bush started in 2001.
Obama has been cleaning up since 2009.
You do the math.|||It should have been Bush's war. He never should have abandoned the effort in Afghanistan to start a war of convenience. So no, Afghanistan is not Bush's war and hasn't been since 2003. And by the way, liberals have NEVER called Afghanistan Bush's war so not sure where you came up with that.|||No, even those far left anchors on MSNBC are now calling this 0bama's war.|||This is our children's future tax payments War.
Remember this is all debt, all the time.
Hard to tell the difference between someone who starts something, and someone who continues it who knows better.|||If you voted for Obama, and you're honest with yourself, you should be furious right about now.|||If we clean out Afghanistan and be successful then it will be Obama's war. If we get our rear ends handed to us then it will be Bush's war.|||Let's just hope it isn't the next Presidents war.
What is there in Obama's past indicating that he qualifies to be the leader of the free world?
Are there any people here that can answer this question honestly, without bashing another candidate, party or changing the subject?
I'll rephrase this very simple question another way:
Is there anything in Obama's past that indicates he can be leader of the free world and if so, what is it that precisely makes him a viable candidate?
If you're incapable of answering this question, kindly skip over it. Thanks!What is there in Obama's past indicating that he qualifies to be the leader of the free world?There's a great book called "Call to Greatness" which talks about the challenges our next president will face.
In it, the author feels there are 7 qualities the next president must have:
1) The ability to respond decisively to a crisis.
2) The ability to set priorities.
3) The ability to mobilize resources.
4) The ability to maintain political unity and shrewd timing.
5) The ability to communicate and understandable public strategy.
6) The ability to offer us a vision beyond war.
7) The ability to take us from peril to promise.
When I look at Obama, I am concerned about his lack of experience and his ability to do any of these things. If I look at it honestly, Palin is more qualified than Obama.What is there in Obama's past indicating that he qualifies to be the leader of the free world?
You have first to realize the difference between leadership and electability
It is very rare that you find both qualities in the same candidate.
I think that Sen Obama is electable.He is educated,well spoken and camera friendly,he has stood and won elections in the past.But as a leader,I can't see it.What committees has he led,legislature introduced troops or corporations directed.All of these make a leader along with a clear vision of how to get to the final objective.
Ron Paul is a leader but he is not electable on a national level
John McCain has leadership qualities but is not electable
Presidents like Ronald Reagan come along once in a while unfortunately. What is there in Obama's past indicating that he qualifies to be the leader of the free world?without bashing another candidate:
Bush is not a candidate. What made him qualified to be the leader of the free world?
The answer to the question is that no one has ever been qualified. You don't go to college and major in being President or go to President Preparatory School. The idea of President is that anyone, even you or a peanut farmer can become President and he or she will have a team of advisers to help direct you on decisions. The idea that you have to be some elitist superhuman to be President was never the intent of the constitution. You should feel like one day you will be President and or instill these values in your children.
I hope you don't consider this answer as unworthy ...
Obama has a past ... that enables him too see the benefits of a good education that came from the support of family who worked hard to provide him with that education.....
He understands that if given the opportunity.. anybody in American can make a success of themselves... and that perhaps too many are denied such opportunities. I don't believe that he would be naive enough to think that SOME people would still not succeed.. BUT at least they had opportunity to.
He also is not an insular person...as in just knowing about the USA.. he KNOWS about other people, nations and how we all are a part of a tapestry that is OUR WORLD.. how what happens in the USA can affect the rest of the world and vice-versa
He is NOT an ignorant fool.. and has gained the respect of many other nations' populations.
If I were an American... I would be definitely Voting for Obama .. if not working the campaign...
What is there in Obama's past indicating that he qualifies to be the leader of the free world?The fact that the majority of Americans plan to vote for him.
There is no experience requirement. Despite the fact that Republicans have been screaming about experience for 18+ months, the majority of Americans still plan to vote for Obama.
McCain has revealed himself to be an impetuous, undisciplined, erratic candidate, and the American people have made their choice.
Despite McCain's experience, Americans don't trust him.What is there in Obama's past indicating that he qualifies to be the leader of the free world?
Having payed attention I can find nothing at all. If he's not on several government watch lists for his associations I would like to know why!
He is a lawyer, not a mathematician, so he is not qualified to do my taxes much less the taxes of the whole nation. He has zero military experience, except as possibly a protester against it, and so shouldn't be commander in chief.He himself said a certain moral issue was "above his pay grade", sounds like he will shirk that and other important issues as well.We can't afford a president that effectively will be "present" when we need a man of action-not just words.
there is no way to make Obama electable with out
dogging someone else(all the while claiming what
he is doing to others is what others are doing to him)
the worse he can make others look the better he looks
and the farther down he can put his opponent the higher
he can stand on the pedestal...
if "The Sociopath Next Door" was required reading,
people like Obama wouldn't get as far as they do...
the sad thing is most people don't realize, they are
dealing with a sociopath until they have been taken/hurt
by the sociopath...
always nosnodWhat is there in Obama's past indicating that he qualifies to be the leader of the free world?
His judgment appears more sound than McCain from the debates, and he has the endorsement of many people with long experience in government who attest to that.
He has built up good relationships with potential cabinet members and members of congress.
Well let me think, no that's no good, nope that's not good either, no that's even worse, hold on I'm thinking real hard, Oh yeah naww that's ridiculous, nope that's stupid, well there you have it couldn't find a damn thing///man he's got nothing
Barack and his wife alike both graduated from prestigious universities where studied law and political science. he held voter registration rallies. He's a senator of the US he answers debate questions without stammering. he's not running against palin but mccain.
He was right about Iraq. He is right about Afghanistan and Pakistan. He is right about capturing or killing Osama bin Laden--which Bush seems unwilling to do.
Well, in his most recent past Colin Powell endorsed him. I would say that's a pretty serious endorsement considering it help GWB get elected.
he won every card game of WAR , he also won every game of battleship, and he figure if the current doofus can become president so can he
Not the free world. A Communist society maybe, but definitely not a free one with a capitalist economy.
He is no more qualified than Sarah Palin to lead this country, probably even less qualified.
THERE IS NOTHING NADA ZILCH. B. HUSSEIN OBAMA HAS NO PROVEN LEADERSHIP SKILLS. I DON'T WANT ANY OF THIS GARBAGE ABOUT HIS DAYS AT HARVARD EITHER SINCE HIS TRANSCRIPTS ARE A MYSTERY.
Great question, not to many good answers. I can't see how obama could get a job as a school crossing guard with his back-round.
He has no intention of being the leader of the "free" world.
Clearly freedom is of no value to him.
Obama is intelligent, level headed, and capable of restoring foreign relations around the world..
If he gets in then it will because the people want him that's what qualifies him to be leader.
Nothing.
http://www.rawtruthobama.com/
Simply and honestly...NO - nothing in his past makes him qualified to lead this nation. Just the opposite in fact.
McCain Is Better...
Well nothing
You proved your point. Thanks.
McCain/Palin '08
How about the ability to run a successful campaign for President. The Presidency of the United States is probably the most powerful position one could have. You must be able to manage the interests of big money donors as well as the interests of the masses. All the while you are being attacked by your opponent and their surrogates. Regardless of whether Obama wins the election, he has proven to be a very successful campaigner and fundraiser.
Everything he's done since college!
.....Graduated magna *** laude from Harvard and instead of taking the fancy, well paid, 'rubbing shoulders with the Elites', New York firm positions he was offered Obama moved to Chicago and worked as a civil rights attorney and fought for the rights of the working poor.
He also was a Illinois state Senator and has been a U.S. Senator since 2004.
Have you read his books?
Sometimes people come along who just are brilliant and gifted and have the capacity to move people to be the best of themselves!
I see that and evidently millions of Americans do as well!
1. He has shown wise judgment in opposing the policies of the Bush Administration.
2. He knows that this country is for all Americans, not just the wealthy.
3. When he speaks to world leaders like how he did in Iraq, progress is made.
He voted against our socialist president Bush's attack on Iraq. We sure could use those trillions of dollars right about now.
I'll rephrase this very simple question another way:
Is there anything in Obama's past that indicates he can be leader of the free world and if so, what is it that precisely makes him a viable candidate?
If you're incapable of answering this question, kindly skip over it. Thanks!What is there in Obama's past indicating that he qualifies to be the leader of the free world?There's a great book called "Call to Greatness" which talks about the challenges our next president will face.
In it, the author feels there are 7 qualities the next president must have:
1) The ability to respond decisively to a crisis.
2) The ability to set priorities.
3) The ability to mobilize resources.
4) The ability to maintain political unity and shrewd timing.
5) The ability to communicate and understandable public strategy.
6) The ability to offer us a vision beyond war.
7) The ability to take us from peril to promise.
When I look at Obama, I am concerned about his lack of experience and his ability to do any of these things. If I look at it honestly, Palin is more qualified than Obama.What is there in Obama's past indicating that he qualifies to be the leader of the free world?
You have first to realize the difference between leadership and electability
It is very rare that you find both qualities in the same candidate.
I think that Sen Obama is electable.He is educated,well spoken and camera friendly,he has stood and won elections in the past.But as a leader,I can't see it.What committees has he led,legislature introduced troops or corporations directed.All of these make a leader along with a clear vision of how to get to the final objective.
Ron Paul is a leader but he is not electable on a national level
John McCain has leadership qualities but is not electable
Presidents like Ronald Reagan come along once in a while unfortunately. What is there in Obama's past indicating that he qualifies to be the leader of the free world?without bashing another candidate:
Bush is not a candidate. What made him qualified to be the leader of the free world?
The answer to the question is that no one has ever been qualified. You don't go to college and major in being President or go to President Preparatory School. The idea of President is that anyone, even you or a peanut farmer can become President and he or she will have a team of advisers to help direct you on decisions. The idea that you have to be some elitist superhuman to be President was never the intent of the constitution. You should feel like one day you will be President and or instill these values in your children.
I hope you don't consider this answer as unworthy ...
Obama has a past ... that enables him too see the benefits of a good education that came from the support of family who worked hard to provide him with that education.....
He understands that if given the opportunity.. anybody in American can make a success of themselves... and that perhaps too many are denied such opportunities. I don't believe that he would be naive enough to think that SOME people would still not succeed.. BUT at least they had opportunity to.
He also is not an insular person...as in just knowing about the USA.. he KNOWS about other people, nations and how we all are a part of a tapestry that is OUR WORLD.. how what happens in the USA can affect the rest of the world and vice-versa
He is NOT an ignorant fool.. and has gained the respect of many other nations' populations.
If I were an American... I would be definitely Voting for Obama .. if not working the campaign...
What is there in Obama's past indicating that he qualifies to be the leader of the free world?The fact that the majority of Americans plan to vote for him.
There is no experience requirement. Despite the fact that Republicans have been screaming about experience for 18+ months, the majority of Americans still plan to vote for Obama.
McCain has revealed himself to be an impetuous, undisciplined, erratic candidate, and the American people have made their choice.
Despite McCain's experience, Americans don't trust him.What is there in Obama's past indicating that he qualifies to be the leader of the free world?
Having payed attention I can find nothing at all. If he's not on several government watch lists for his associations I would like to know why!
He is a lawyer, not a mathematician, so he is not qualified to do my taxes much less the taxes of the whole nation. He has zero military experience, except as possibly a protester against it, and so shouldn't be commander in chief.He himself said a certain moral issue was "above his pay grade", sounds like he will shirk that and other important issues as well.We can't afford a president that effectively will be "present" when we need a man of action-not just words.
there is no way to make Obama electable with out
dogging someone else(all the while claiming what
he is doing to others is what others are doing to him)
the worse he can make others look the better he looks
and the farther down he can put his opponent the higher
he can stand on the pedestal...
if "The Sociopath Next Door" was required reading,
people like Obama wouldn't get as far as they do...
the sad thing is most people don't realize, they are
dealing with a sociopath until they have been taken/hurt
by the sociopath...
always nosnodWhat is there in Obama's past indicating that he qualifies to be the leader of the free world?
His judgment appears more sound than McCain from the debates, and he has the endorsement of many people with long experience in government who attest to that.
He has built up good relationships with potential cabinet members and members of congress.
Well let me think, no that's no good, nope that's not good either, no that's even worse, hold on I'm thinking real hard, Oh yeah naww that's ridiculous, nope that's stupid, well there you have it couldn't find a damn thing///man he's got nothing
Barack and his wife alike both graduated from prestigious universities where studied law and political science. he held voter registration rallies. He's a senator of the US he answers debate questions without stammering. he's not running against palin but mccain.
He was right about Iraq. He is right about Afghanistan and Pakistan. He is right about capturing or killing Osama bin Laden--which Bush seems unwilling to do.
Well, in his most recent past Colin Powell endorsed him. I would say that's a pretty serious endorsement considering it help GWB get elected.
he won every card game of WAR , he also won every game of battleship, and he figure if the current doofus can become president so can he
Not the free world. A Communist society maybe, but definitely not a free one with a capitalist economy.
He is no more qualified than Sarah Palin to lead this country, probably even less qualified.
THERE IS NOTHING NADA ZILCH. B. HUSSEIN OBAMA HAS NO PROVEN LEADERSHIP SKILLS. I DON'T WANT ANY OF THIS GARBAGE ABOUT HIS DAYS AT HARVARD EITHER SINCE HIS TRANSCRIPTS ARE A MYSTERY.
Great question, not to many good answers. I can't see how obama could get a job as a school crossing guard with his back-round.
He has no intention of being the leader of the "free" world.
Clearly freedom is of no value to him.
Obama is intelligent, level headed, and capable of restoring foreign relations around the world..
If he gets in then it will because the people want him that's what qualifies him to be leader.
Nothing.
http://www.rawtruthobama.com/
Simply and honestly...NO - nothing in his past makes him qualified to lead this nation. Just the opposite in fact.
McCain Is Better...
Well nothing
You proved your point. Thanks.
McCain/Palin '08
How about the ability to run a successful campaign for President. The Presidency of the United States is probably the most powerful position one could have. You must be able to manage the interests of big money donors as well as the interests of the masses. All the while you are being attacked by your opponent and their surrogates. Regardless of whether Obama wins the election, he has proven to be a very successful campaigner and fundraiser.
Everything he's done since college!
.....Graduated magna *** laude from Harvard and instead of taking the fancy, well paid, 'rubbing shoulders with the Elites', New York firm positions he was offered Obama moved to Chicago and worked as a civil rights attorney and fought for the rights of the working poor.
He also was a Illinois state Senator and has been a U.S. Senator since 2004.
Have you read his books?
Sometimes people come along who just are brilliant and gifted and have the capacity to move people to be the best of themselves!
I see that and evidently millions of Americans do as well!
1. He has shown wise judgment in opposing the policies of the Bush Administration.
2. He knows that this country is for all Americans, not just the wealthy.
3. When he speaks to world leaders like how he did in Iraq, progress is made.
He voted against our socialist president Bush's attack on Iraq. We sure could use those trillions of dollars right about now.
Is it true that Obama is planning on letting people with an American visa become resident's?
I heard that obama is planning on letting anyone with an american visa become a resident of the U.S. Is this in anyway true? If so when will this happen? My boyfriend is Dominican with a travel visa and would like to know if this is true.Is it true that Obama is planning on letting people with an American visa become resident's?Nope Obama cannot do it alone.If this were the case Bush would have did it 8 years agoIs it true that Obama is planning on letting people with an American visa become resident's?
Nope Obama cannot do it alone.If this were the case Bush would have did it 8 years ago
=============================
'Cannot block..' is right. Both the Republicans, under Bush, and the Democrats, under Obama, are trying to open the doors. Computer Data Bases are very easy to create. The Federal Government refuses to create a data base on the illegal aliens in this country, but where the States have done so, illegal aliens are very, very expensive. Even so.. the Federal Government is doing all it can to open the doors with staunch democrats and republicans doing what they can stop this mess.Is it true that Obama is planning on letting people with an American visa become resident's?NO and you can thank the invading of illegals for that.We have so many people here that aren't suppose to be here that they are cracking down on people that want to do it the legal way.He can go to Mexico and sneak across though and then get on a train or bus.That is done ALL the time.How do you think you Canadians get illegal hispanics from south america up there?Is it true that Obama is planning on letting people with an American visa become resident's?
he is already giving them free drivers license , why not? I think before long our lil country called America will be nothing but a burning bush on the map, thanks to him letting islam radical idiots take refugee here.Is it true that Obama is planning on letting people with an American visa become resident's?We won't need visas soon. Soon enough you will be able to just walk in, demand health care and welfare cheques and section 8 housing and you will be all set.Is it true that Obama is planning on letting people with an American visa become resident's?
That would definitely not surprise me, that sounds like something Barry would do.
You heard wrong.
Nope Obama cannot do it alone.If this were the case Bush would have did it 8 years ago
=============================
'Cannot block..' is right. Both the Republicans, under Bush, and the Democrats, under Obama, are trying to open the doors. Computer Data Bases are very easy to create. The Federal Government refuses to create a data base on the illegal aliens in this country, but where the States have done so, illegal aliens are very, very expensive. Even so.. the Federal Government is doing all it can to open the doors with staunch democrats and republicans doing what they can stop this mess.Is it true that Obama is planning on letting people with an American visa become resident's?NO and you can thank the invading of illegals for that.We have so many people here that aren't suppose to be here that they are cracking down on people that want to do it the legal way.He can go to Mexico and sneak across though and then get on a train or bus.That is done ALL the time.How do you think you Canadians get illegal hispanics from south america up there?Is it true that Obama is planning on letting people with an American visa become resident's?
he is already giving them free drivers license , why not? I think before long our lil country called America will be nothing but a burning bush on the map, thanks to him letting islam radical idiots take refugee here.Is it true that Obama is planning on letting people with an American visa become resident's?We won't need visas soon. Soon enough you will be able to just walk in, demand health care and welfare cheques and section 8 housing and you will be all set.Is it true that Obama is planning on letting people with an American visa become resident's?
That would definitely not surprise me, that sounds like something Barry would do.
You heard wrong.
Is it possible that a beltholder doesn麓t advance to the semi finals of the super six tournament on Show time?
Is it possible that a beltholder doesn麓t advance to the semi finals?
For example Kessler wins his first two fights but looses his third fight vs. a fighter who lost his first two fights.In that case Kessler would advance but the other fighter with the belt now would still be eliminated.
Does the constellation of the first three fights for each fighter allow that possibility?
On a sidenote what happens if two figters have the same amount of points after three fights?Which fighter gets the higher seed?Is it possible that a beltholder doesn麓t advance to the semi finals of the super six tournament on Show time?It's very possible a belt holder does not adavance. I think you're understanding the tournament wrong.
For you're sidenote, I think the tie breaker would be split decision vs unanimous. and if they are tied from there i'm not sure, i personally thought 2 more fighters should have been involved to make things even out. but as tough as it was to get those 6 already, i'm asking for a long shot.Is it possible that a beltholder doesn麓t advance to the semi finals of the super six tournament on Show time?Yeah it very possible I personally don't think Carl Froch will beat Andre Dirrell.
For example Kessler wins his first two fights but looses his third fight vs. a fighter who lost his first two fights.In that case Kessler would advance but the other fighter with the belt now would still be eliminated.
Does the constellation of the first three fights for each fighter allow that possibility?
On a sidenote what happens if two figters have the same amount of points after three fights?Which fighter gets the higher seed?Is it possible that a beltholder doesn麓t advance to the semi finals of the super six tournament on Show time?It's very possible a belt holder does not adavance. I think you're understanding the tournament wrong.
For you're sidenote, I think the tie breaker would be split decision vs unanimous. and if they are tied from there i'm not sure, i personally thought 2 more fighters should have been involved to make things even out. but as tough as it was to get those 6 already, i'm asking for a long shot.Is it possible that a beltholder doesn麓t advance to the semi finals of the super six tournament on Show time?Yeah it very possible I personally don't think Carl Froch will beat Andre Dirrell.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)