Rational questions for those who feel Obama is a failure...

[SkyDaddy7]

I want to ask a few...

Question-How can you say the Republicans did not get what they wanted during the Bush years? 5yrs with no vetoes. Don't fall for the Conservative Values Fiscal Responsibility Argument PLEASE!

Question-Were those on the left during the Bush years promoting violence against our government? Have you watched FOX TABLOID News? I have no idea about you but it does not sound like the rhetoric coming from left to me!

"Wars based on lies" IRAQ was based on LIEs...Afghanistan was grossly mishandled.
(Side Note)If you buy into the religion of Alex Jones and/or the 9/11 Truth Club this question is not for you...As you do not have the ability to grasp reality much like those who worship Bronze Age Myths.

Question-Do you think it would have been better to have just attempted talks with the Taliban and Al-Qaeda after 9/11 instead of sending our military in?

Question-Do you think President Obama is the same as Bush when it comes to foreign policy and how he looks at the world? Did Bush and the Republicans even care about Middle East Peace until their last few months in Office?

Question-Do you think it would have been wise to leave the banks, financial institutions, Insurance Companies, and auto companies alone until next year while President Obama's budget was being debated in congress? If not, then why talk as if President Obama is favoring the banks over us? These are not separate problems that can be dealt with each by themselves. Remember the stool President Obama spoke of? Well, never mind you do not trust Obama, from what you and a growing number of people have said here on DU President Obama only cares about the rich and is no better than a Republican. Many of you have actually called him a Republican.


Question- Was the $800 Billion stimulus package for the banks or the largest attempt in the history of this country to try and help those of us hurting? If you missed this legislation try an Google "American Recovery and Reinvestment Act" or if you can stomach anything the Obama Administration has to say then go to http://www.recovery.gov /

Must read and understand the above question before reading the next one...

Question-Do you think if President Obama just ignored the banks and the credit crunch as so many of you and the (out of power) Republicans wanted that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act would have any impact whatsoever?

Question-Was Obama's $275 Billion Housing Plan not for us? I personally know two families that this plan not only saved them money but saved them from being homeless! DO YOU REMEMBER THE RANT BY RICK SANTELLI and the REPUBLICANS? Look at what that plan has already done for so many of us ordinary Americans! Does the success of this program matter to you? Or does it bother you, make you really MAD that banks are making money off refinancing so many homes?

Question- WHY IS THERE NO INTEREST or POST ABOUT ALL THE HISTORIC MOVES PRESIDENT OBAMA HAS ALREADY DONE FOR US?

Question-WHY IS IT THAT WE ARE ONLY 3 MONTHS INTO PRESIDENT OBAMA'S 4YRS TERM AND MANY HERE SAY AND ARGUE THAT OBAMA IS NO BETTER THAN REPUBLICANS? ...Or that he is in fact a Republican as many have said.

QUESTION-WHAT WOULD THE COUNTRY LOOK LIKE RIGHT NOW WITH REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT JOHN MCCAIN AND HIS BRONZE AGE DARLING SARAH PALIN? Spending freeze anyone? More tax breaks for the top 5% anyone? Bronze Age laws banning anything Sarah Palin thinks is not moral?

STATEMENT-I am very proud of the job President Obama is doing! I could care less if the COOL thing to do here on DU is to ignore the FACTS and join Rush, Sean , Glenn and the rest of FOX News and label President Obama a failure NOT EVEN MONTHS INTO HIS TERM. I understand these are hard times I was dropped by my Insurance Company (Principal Financial) because I cost to much after a devastating Spinal Cord Injury but I refuse to let my anger override my ability to understand reality! President Obama does not favor the rich over us and those who say he does are WRONG!

I am new here and I love this forum...However, I am growing very confused as to what it is most of you here want? Questioning our leaders is a MUST but getting worked up into a mindless mob does nothing! Look at the TEA BAGGERS!

I know I will be attacked with pick forks, tar & feathered, and possible hung for saying ASKING QUESTIONS that do not conform to the MOB but I am looking at the BIG PICTURE despite how bad I personally need some relief.

I am 100% behind OUR President right now, I will continue to drink the Kool-Aid as it is tasting really SWEET to me! I think a growing number of people are losing sight of what Obama has already done and is trying hard to get done through his historic budget proposal. And to compare the Bush years and the rhetoric from the left during those years to what the Bronze Age thinking freaks are doing on the right is INSANE!!!!!!!!!!!!! HOW MANY LEFT WING LIBERALS WENT ON KILLING SPREES DUE TO RUMORS SPREAD BY THE LEFT WING LIBERAL BIAS MEDIA?

Seriously, what happened to critical thinking and rational thought here on DU that made me want more than anything to be a part of?

[Political Heretic]

1. I don't believe the questions will be rational with a post title like that.

All I read was your post title.

The overwhelming (like 99%) of people here who have disagreements with policies of this administration are not calling Obama a "republican failure."

That kind of hyperbole doesn't connect with "rational."

So I don't think I'll waste time reading what is likely to be a very disappointing post.

[SkyDaddy7]

7. I saw many comments

That either compared him to a Republican, said he was no better than a Republican and YES some that sai he was a Republican...And I guess you will tell me almost no one called Clinton a Republican either.

Right, I guess you do a lot of Judging of books by their covers.

If you revisit I ask you to please read it and give me your opinion...

[Uzybone]

2. your all caps headline will take away from a very good post

as is mostly trolls and knee jerk haters will respond to this post.

[SkyDaddy7]

6. You are very right...

I apologize I went back an corrected it.

[G_j]

3. delete

not reading

[Marrah_G]

4. Not everyone feels the same way you do.

[SkyDaddy7]

5. Of cousre!

I do not want everyone to feel the way I do...I want a discussion that answers these questions?

Is this wrong to ask questions that others do not like?

[leftchick]

8. apparently you are not suffering from his coddling of wall streeters

my family and I and millions of others are. TIME IS UP!

[SkyDaddy7]

10. Do you not see what his overall objective is?

Like it or not we have a capitalist system and without the banks nothing else matters...I know that sounds bad but not even the stimulus bill would work without crdit flowing.

All I am saying is there is way more to it than the banks.

[leftchick]

12. um no I do not ,except for bailout of wallstreet criminals

Every economist of merit says, here I go yet again, seize the big banks, get rid of bad management and toxic 'assets' then employ strict re-regulation. Oh and after fucking BILLIONS AND BILLIONS to banks is credit 'flowing'? Perhaps that is too much for you to grasp? Time is up!

[SkyDaddy7]

14. I like the "Economist of Merit"

If Obama did exactly what Krugman and others on the left suggest then that would be it...No Healthcare, Energy, or Education reform, NOTHING! Economist do not talk in terms of political reality they simply say what they would do...This is the problem I am getting at many are forgetting about what is best for America in exchange for revenge on the banks. I am all for revenge but I would rather see something actually get done in this country other than talk.

Time will tell.

Thanks for being so polite.

[girl gone mad]

18. This isn't about "revenge".

That's a dim bankster talking point.

This is about doing the right thing and protecting the taxpayer (you and me) from being robbed. The solutions that the administration is employing are extremely risky. They are essentially transferring debt from private individuals and institutions onto the public's balance sheet. You talk about no health care reform, energy reform, etc., but for the Geithner strategy to work, we have to take on so much risk and so much debt, there is a good chance that there won't be money left to do any kind of reforms.

[SkyDaddy7]

23. It is risky...

I was not repeating any bankster talking points I am honestly asking a question. And yes there are people out there who do want revenge and I think they would like to see that despite the consequences. I am not saying that is the majority but it is out there.

I am not am economist but what other option do we have without bringing the entire economy down? Or creating a political backlash that does shatter any hopes of reform on Healthcare Energy and education. Please tell me as I don't see it.

Nationalizing Banks would either have the government take on the debt or erase it and bring down everything connected. Please understand I am not trying to defend the banks or these big financial institutions like Principal who dropped my coverage after I suffered a Spinal cord Injury and the bills got extremely expensive. Now I am on Medicare and had to get divorced in order to qualify without paying and insane penalty...I would love revenge but I understand that could cause more damage than it would be worth. I do like the idea of a entity like the FDIC that would have powers to step in on these so-called To Big To Fail institutions.

Thank you for your comment and please tell me if you know of other options?

[MasonJar]

35. Take time to look at Moyer's interview of Mr Black, who was instrumental

in solving the Savings and Loan debacle. Even if giving money to companies is a possible solution, it was really moronic to do it without clear regulations in place pre-one dime being issued. Geithner and Summers are in their element, giving money to their future and former employers. Obama should never have selected them and now he refuses to fire them. He is complicit...perhaps on purpose. In addition Obama is defending Bush rendition and torture policies and even expanding them. The least that I expected was for him to appoint a Special Prosecutor; instead Obama and Holder are defending Bush crimes, which again makes them and all of us complicit. And as to his obnoxious plans for education; they surpass even Bush's idiocy.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SkyDaddy7]

27. And you think Obama wants to continue them?

Come on, the name calling is not productive...I want to hear everything you have to say but talking to me like that erodes respect...Look I had a spinal cord injury 7 yrs ago and my insurance company cancelled me right when i needed my insuranc e the most. I KNOW HARD TIMES IN MORE WAYS THAN YOU EVER IMAGINE! So please stop with the childish comments and tell me why you think Obama is simply an extension of Reagan?

Stimulus plan
housing plan
and his budget all are aimed at changing America for good...I simply can't find the connection to Reagan?

[leftchick]

28. I edited

re-read my post for clarification. Btw, I have seen you post zero links about anything economically positive done by Obama at all. Like I said, I am so glad for you, obviously your life literally does not hang in the balance like mine and my childrens.

[SkyDaddy7]

31. You are one cold hearted person!!!

I just got done telling you about my situation and you have the nerve to say that? How cold can you be? Why? Does it make you feel good? I am sorry for you and your kids but damn?

Why? You are cold!!!

You had better hope you never end up in the dark world of Spinal Cord Injury you would pray to be where you are now. You are a shining example of what is wrong with America SELFISH!!!

[leftchick]

34. if you think I am cold?

lol! That is pathetic, the word is REALISTIC and I know where this country ,and my children are headed and it sucks. I am so sorry you can not handle the truth. I feel really sad for you all because you will wake up one day and be horrified. Perhaps you should read a little Howard Zinn and his The Peoples History of the US to get a better grasp.

[SkyDaddy7]

You have issues and I feel sorry for you

The anger and lack of compassion you have within you is not healthy. I am sorry you feel the way you do but you won't find answers to it in the American Political scene. I am fully aware of the book and know it very well...that has no context within this discussion. You need some serious self reflection before you rub off on your kids!

[leftchick]

39. omg

you are one arrogant sob! You have no idea what we are going through. NONE! And to lecture me on what is right is beyond bizarre on a message board. We are done.

[SkyDaddy7]

37. You have issues and I feel sorry for you

The anger and lack of compassion you have within you is not healthy. I am sorry you feel the way you do but you won't find answers to it in the American Political scene. I am fully aware of the book and know it very well...that has no context within this discussion. You need some serious self reflection before you rub off on your kids!

[leftchick]

30. given all of that history

it is completely sad how naive you are. I am sure sunshine and lollipops are in your future. :eyes:

[SkyDaddy7]

32. YOU ARE A SICK PERSON!

[DJ13]

9. Its far too early in his term to judge him

But.......in the biggest single issue he faces, the economy, he IS handling it in much the same way as Bush was with further bailouts of the fat cats who were gambling, and should lose their bets.........and thats probably in part responsible for your impression that some consider him to be a Republican.

[SkyDaddy7]

11. I have to disagree...

Many say he is doing what Bush did but if he does not recapitalize the banks then what? The 800 billion dollar stimulus is worthless and our economy rots in a depression for perhaps a decade...We are so spoiled we can't possibly see how bad it would really get if we ignored the banks and let them fail.

I know people do not want to hear that and that is why I am asking the question...If we do not bail out the banks then what? It is so easy for everyone to sit back and say he is being easy to those who caused the mess but does Obama have a choice without sending the unemployment rate to 20-25% and destroying the economy for who knows how long...And for what? Principal? Like the Republicans say?

[eridani]

13. RE Afghanistan

There is a big difference between invading for the purpose of getting bin Laden and associates and trying to take over and run the country. We outsourced the former and kept the latter (which should never have been done anyway) in house. Should have been the other way around.

[SkyDaddy7]

15. I totally agree!

I think Obama does too...If he is being honest and I have no reason at this point to think he is not. We are there to set up a government that can keep stuff like 9/11 from being planned and executed and we will leave. That is the plan and I can't bring myself to call Obama a liar like others until I see his lies.

[eridani]

19. We should not be setting up any kind of government in Afghanistan or anywhere else

How about some other country decides they need to set up a different government for us? Why would anybody else in the world like it any better than we would?

Look, there are all sorts of indigenous formations and groups in Afghanistan that would like to improve their country. Why don't we just butt out of domination and ask them what they need? That has worked nicely on the issue of female genital mutilation. Western feminists didn't just barge in and tell Africans what they should be doing--they looked for the indigenous groups already working on the issue and found ways of helping them.

[SkyDaddy7]

24. So we should have never went into Afghanistan?

Despite what happen on 9/11? If so, what adverse effects, if any, do you think could have happened? Same if we leave now...You dont think Al-Queada would have a free play ground in which to plan attacks? Fund their operations with poppies?

This are questions that I bat around in my head all the time...I am not trying to put you on the spot I just wonder what your opinion is on these very important questions.

Thanks!

[eridani]

43. The only conceivable justification for going into Afghanistan was to get bin Laden

And Afghanistan had fuckall to do with 9/11. The operation was planned in Hamburg and London and Kuala Lumpur, and led by Saudis who got into the US via a no questions asked accelerated visa approval system (which, BTW, some diplomats had been raising hell about for years, and which Powell refused to shut down for a full year AFTER 9/11). And the suicide pilots learned to fly right here in the US. When FBI agents tried to get FISA requests filed to find out why so many of them wanted to learn to fly but not to land, their superiors shot them down and refused to pass them along.

Unfortunately, with imperial domination helping people is strictly secondary to the domination thing if it occurs at all. You can tell when domiation is the agenda because dominators always look for local elite cats' paws to carry out thos agenda, which eventually fails because the locals always have their own sometimes contradictory agendas as well. For that reason, the dominators are constantly switching sides. Look for that--it's how you can tell what's actually going on.

Our first intervention was recruiting radical Islamists from all over the world to fight against the Soviets starting in 1979, with the deliberate intention (according to Brzezinski) of drawing the Soviets into a Vietnam-like quagmire. We paid American universities to develop pro-jihadi textbooks. Of the native reactionaries, we gave most of our $5 billion or so financial aid to Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, who made his bones in the 70s thowing acid in the faces of female university students. (Yes, as late as 1975, female students in Kabul occasionally wore miniskirts.) The CIA knew all about his prior history, and they were happy to watch him burn down girls' schools. Now we have a price on his head. The CIA does a lot BSing about how they never did finacially support bin Laden. True, but only because they invited him to the party precisely because he donated a bunch of his own money to the cause.

After the Soviets left, warlord factions destroyed a lot of Kabul and killed around 40,000 of its citizens. We fully supported the Pakistani ISI in their sponsorship of the Taliban, which the warlord-weary population of Afghanistan thought might suppress lawlessness. Imperial agent Zalmay Khalilzad (currently our ambassador to Iraq) even wrote a WaPo editorial in 1997 explaining how the Taliban were agents of stability and not nearly as bad as those Shi'ite fundies in Iran. Now we don't like them for having temporarily harbored bin Laden.

AFter 9-11 we ignored constant pleas from indigenous anti-Taliban forces to not engage in massive bombing of civilians in support of the Northern Alliance warlords (formerly Soviet-allied, so we switched sides again). After our new allies kicked the Taliban out of major population centers, we refused to let the Loya Jirga of 2002 install their choice of ruler, the former king (favored mainly because he had pissed off the fewest number of people). They also wanted nothing to do with the warlords we insisted on installing instead, but we installed them anyway.

Our current campaign there consists of supporting warlords who are not much different from the Taliban (except for being slightly less puritanical and a lot more corrupt) with extensive bombing of civilians. That's gotten bad enough so that Lambchop Karzai occasionally bites Ms. Shari the Dominator right on the nose, at least verbally.

Why in fecking hell anybody believes that more of the same can possibly do Afghanistan any good is beyond me.

[SammyWinstonJack]

33. Neither the Afghanistan nor Iraq Government had anything to do with the planning or execution of 9/l...

Our 'government' OTHO......LIHOP if not MIHOP.

[ima_sinnic]

16. you forgot 3 deal breakers: covering up for war criminals, wiretapping US citizens w/out warrant,

and continuing to hold Guantanamo detainees without charging them with anything--not only just holding them, but actively resisting their efforts to sue for habeas corpus. And this is supposed to be a "constitutional scholar" who PROMISED, literally on Day 1, that "we are a country of laws" and that habeas corpus would be reinstated stat.

He is a liar on these issues. Until they are resolved, how can I just sing kumbaya and pretend everything is aok in lalaland? as long as one person is wasting away in a prison without being charged, as long as war crimes are on American's hands with no one held accountable, you and me and none of us are truly free and without shame. These crimes are a cancer that destroy our humanity and make us look like pigs in the eyes of the world.

In addition, he dismissed legalization of marijuan at that Town Hall meeting as though it was a joke and not worthy even of talking about. That to me was very very stupid and exposed who he really cares about. A very large portion of his base, those who busted their butts to get him elected, are a new generation who smoke pot, or don't care if anybody else does. All of us see the stupidity of keeping it illegal, except, apparently, him. His dumbass attitude dismisses We The People as not important, just future prisoners for the victimless crime of smoking pot and he couldn't give a shit about that, or about the fact that Mexican drug cartels and drug gang violence would evaporate, states would collect billions in taxes and licensing fees, overcrowded prisons would empty--but our privatized security and prison systems would not make any profit from that, now, would they?

And what about his dismissal of single-payer, universal health care because it "would raise taxes"?
Well! shit, then! We couldn't have the poor widdle billionaires contributing to the public good, now could we? How absurd, to think that the health of the vast majority of the country is more important than another 1% in taxes for the billionaires. Can't afford health insurance? TOUGH! die already then!

These are the issues that make it impossible for me to fully support him. I watch the economic thing from afar and know, because of these other issues, that he doesn't really care about We The People. There's other interests he's kowtowing to, behind the scenes. He's "got people," and they ain't us.

[SkyDaddy7]

17. I agree kinda on 2of 3...

First the Marijuana question was BS.

President Obama never said anything about single payer...I know many want this but as far as Obama lying I think that is not the case on this issue.

GITMO...I wish it were as easy as you and others make it sound. I believe the process was set in motion on day one. I do not think you would just want him to open the doors and say your free? Bush fucked shit up so bad now we have to find places to put the bad ones and which ones to release. How they will be tried and so on.

As far as blocking the legal motions go I think he would like to actually put people on trial before civil cases begin. I have no idea the legal crap he is in?

What I would like to see is investigations AFTER HEALTHCARE, ENERGY and EDUCATION are passed.

[ima_sinnic]

20. those prisoners have been tortured, they cannot be "tried" b/c any "evidence" is tainted

not to mention the injustice WE committed by never charging them with anything.
Yes, I would wish that he would just open the prison doors and send them back to their countries. They are broken and not likely to be capable of much, even if they are "terrorists" or "enemy combatants" (read, people fighting the imperial occupiers of their country, perhaps, or, more likely, hapless souls who were at the wrong place at the wrong time, or wrongfully fingered by "bounty hunters" and neighbors with grudges). After all, what are a few more people in the world who hate us and wish we would just go away, or worse? It's not like we're "safer" because those people are locked up without charge. on edit: meant to say, they were blatantly kidnapped, and they should be suing the shit out of us for that.

You can speculate all you want about his "reasons." If he has "reasons" for the Guantanamo detainee atrocities, why doesn't he tell us what they are? That issue, along with the warrantless wiretapping, is causing serious erosion of his base. I know I am not alone in my disgust and feeling of being conned. A constitutional scholar should be impeccable in a matter like this, not blowing it off like it doesn't mean shit, claiming "state secrets" like Bush did. I don't even know what his "reasons" are for the wiretapping. Does he not know about the 4th amendment? Again, he gives lip service to "openness," but he is lying.

No, he didn't "lie" about single-payer health insurance, but I accepted that when I was kind of forced to vote for him, hoping that his so-called community organizer past would actually make him sympathetic and bring him around. And he never did say he would bring the war criminals to justice, but again I thought we could prevail, and still hope we can. But he is president now, so like it or not, if he doesn't act on that, he is a war criminal too, as are we all as long as we continue to let them go free with no accountability, hoping some European country will do it for us.

[SkyDaddy7]

21. Thank you

For sharing your thoughts...I can see your point about what is a few hundred more Jihadist out there as Bush created so many it would amount to a drop in the bucket. However, I think, I hope, there will be investigations into war crimes. To be honest the way I see it is this issue must be addressed but I think the political climate is such that he wants to get help to the American people first. There are Democrats in congress who were briefed on what was going on down there in the early days so once this thing starts to unravel I would imagine there will be hell to pay politically if not legally, prob both.

Wiretapping is an issue and to be honest like you concentrating on these issues I have been concentrating on the economy as I feel it has priority. Please understand I am not saying this is not extremely important. What I am saying is Health Care Energy and education will have an huge positive impact on us if passed not to mention how Health care reform would help the budget. Also as time rolls on more info will come to light and pressure will build to investigate war crimes. As far as Obama lying I guess you could say he is but I also leave open the idea he is tip toeing through a political minefield in order to have as many on his side to pass his budget (Health care, energy, education)this year.

Did you see the Nat Geo special on GITMO last week?

[ima_sinnic]

26. yes, I know he has other priorities right now, but he is being too secretive

about the Gitmo thing, and shockingly harsh toward detainees who thought they had hope now, suing for habeas corpus. He needs to explain himself about this, and about the wiretapping. It is just making me not trust him.

And as far as the economy goes, I am disgusted that he has Goldman Sachs lobbyists working on that problem, after he "said" there would be no lobbyists in his administration, and the people "in charge" of the details of the plan are the scumbags themselves who fought regulation tooth and nail and are now putting together some pathetic, toothless, pretend "regulations" so they can keep their Wall St. casino open for the mega rich greedhead worthless bankers and speculators who collect millions and billions in "bonuses" for doing absolutely NOTHING. I'm ignorant about the workings of economics and don't feel like saying much about this, but I have appreciated the insights of more-knowledgeable posters here about how WRONG it all is.

[Two Americas]

25. no one does

No one here thinks that "Obama is a failure."

No one claims that "Palin" - or whatever - would be better.


...

[SkyDaddy7]

29. Really?

NO ONE? I think you need to read more of the threads then...There are plenty of people saying to them Obama is afailure for many reasons but primarily the economy and his stance with the banks.
I never said there were claims of Palin being better choice?

Why do you have to say these kinds of things when you and I know they are not as cut & dry as you say? Why not just discuss the reality of the situation?

[Two Americas]

36. really

Of course this is a public board, and there are a lot of members, so just about anything gets said at some point.

But for all practical purposes, no, no one want Obama to fail or thinks he is a failure.

What people are saying is that they think Obama would be more successful with a different approach on some issues. "More successful." Get it? What is so difficult to fathom there?

The critics are placing the success of the administration first. The self-proclaimed "supporters" are putting their own personal emotional needs for a hero figure above what is best for the administration, the party and the country. The only rebuttal I have ever gotten to that here is a barrages of personal attacks, so I have to assume that there is no rebuttal to that statement.

What many here are demanding is that we see ourselves as children, or employees, or subjects to the rulers. It works the other way around in a representative democracy. The politicians answer to us, represent us, we do not answer to them or represent them.

If you told your child "I think you will be more successful if you look for traffic before you cross the street" is that wishing that they fail? Is that "hating" them? Should we refrain from criticizing them about that, in order to properly "support" them?



....

[SkyDaddy7]

40. I hear you...

Yes, I agree your analysis does apply in many cases...However, like you said,"The self-proclaimed "supporters" are putting their own personal emotional needs for a hero figure above what is best for the administration, the party and the country" and I agree, these emotions for their hero to come in and shut down bad banks, and do whatever it is they want to see happen to these wall street thugs is without really thinking through the ramifications of such ball busting would have on the economy. So, obviosly you have not seen some of the lead threads on the home page the past week or so...There has been incredible anger toward Obama for taking the advice of Geitner & Summers and not going with the opinions of economist like Krugman. And this has generated many "Obama is failure" comments or even he is a Republican Like Clinton! Which I thouught was rather funny myself.

You child crossing the road analogy was very mild comparison to what is really going on. I would say the child has already been hit by the car for many. LOl! Or at least they are currently acting as if that were the case. Again, your quote above was right on the money the way I read it. Whether you meant it the other way I am not sure?

However, if the economy turns around and people get back to work then Obama, Geitner & Summers will be heroes like always when it comes to politics.

Thanks!

[Two Americas]

42. very, very unlikely in my opinion

I think this is very unlikely - "if the economy turns around and people get back to work then Obama, Geitner & Summers will be heroes."

I think that is what people are angry about - for the people, for the country, for the party and for the administration.

I have seen all of the lead threads on the home page the past week or so.

Here is what I think determines the way that people "hear" those lead threads: if you are a leftist, they sound very benign and restrained and tame, because they are when compared to the way you see things. They are very mild to my ears, for example, very tame and moderate. If they seem hateful and destructive to someone, that is probably an indication that they are more centrist or conservative in their political views. The same people defending (conservative) things the administration is doing, are the ones often expressing conservative views here. It is their views they are defending, not the president. On the other side, many people are promoting left wing views here just as they always have. They are not "attacking Obama."

We should debate political views, not use Obama or party loyalty as a subterfuge, as camouflage and cover.

It is very rare that any person here supposedly "supporting the president" does not use that as an opportunity for savaging the leftists. That is what they are really interested in doing, not defending the president. If they can accuse leftists of "tearing down the president" or "hating Obama" - and now we have "defending pirates" believe it or not - they can avoid discussing politics and they have an easier time beating up on the leftists.


...

[SkyDaddy7]

44. Are you an active member of a Union...

I belong to Local 85 Sheet Metal Union here in Atlanta...I no longer work as I suffered a spinal cord injury 7yrs ago.


Take care.

[Bluenorthwest]

38. Hyperbole is so last week

It is over. It has lost all power. Hyperbole is the new ALL CAPS. Or vice versa.

[SkyDaddy7]

41. Thanks!

Care to look pass my failures as a poster and respond to the questions? Or just be critical of my post? I would like to hear your opinion...

Thanks