You know, at first I wrote a long response to your reply. Relies to everything that you once again,for what is probably the 100th time, brought up about the previous administration. But after reading it and seeing that once again all we would be doing is rehashing what we've been debating probably for the past 5 years. I realized that all my response would do was bring back the finger pointing and blame that both political sides have made at their respective parties from the two previous administrations. I realized that it would be fruitless to revist those same disagreements once again.

However I will say that I find it quite ironic that it is NOT the former Bush supporters who keep bringing him up whenever a point is made about current President Obama, but it is actually the Bush haters and the Obama supporters who seem to constantly bring up former President Bush! I think that the Bush supporters have let go. We have realized and accepted that it is time to move on and give support to our newly elected President and his current administration. But the hatred for former president Bush, as displayed for example by Don Z above, continues on! The same people that voted for and agreed that it was time to move on and let go of what took place with the last two adminstrations are the same people who keep reverting back!


I also find it quite interesting, as displayed already in this thread, that whenever someone points out, what they feel is or may be a wrong doing by President Obama, instead of the Obama lovers trying to explain or defend what he may have or is deciding to do, they completely ignore the issue and just bring up something random about former President Bush! It's just unbelievable! Case in point is the post that I made about what I felt was a campaign promise that was broken by the President. Instead of trying to debate what I had posted or try to explain to me that it was not as it appeared to be, my post was completely ignored. But the attack on a former President WAS indeed made!

Why in the world Don Z decided, in this thread, to portray former President Bush as being a scumbag is beyond me. It and he (Bush) has absolutely nothing to do with this thread! Only thing that I can chalk his randomn post off to is sheer hatred Of his not being able to let go and move on.

But let's all be honest here, like him or support him or not, President Bush was a pretty compassionate man and you cannot deny that.

Oh, and for what it's worth, the last picture on the bottom of that post that I made is a little girl who's parents were murdered on 9/11 at the hands of one of those scumbags that pizzaboy started a post about over in another topic. You remember, the guy that was the mastermind behind those attacks....the one that was captured a few years ago....the one that our current President has now forbidden to be called an enemy combatant.


So let's move on here. Let's work towards that "Change" that our current president and his supporters constantly talked about for the last year or so.

I'm ready to do so and I didn't even vote for him.

This is not us vs. them.

Don Z posted a picture and a comment, I did not see the seething hatred that you did.

Your posts sound angry and bitter, DC, why? (Seriously, not trying to insult anyone.)

Not angry or bitter at all and I apologize if it did come off that way. I was more in a state of " What was the reason for that?" kind of mind when I saw Don Z's post.

You are right, it is not us against them. It should not be us against them.

You say that you do not see anything wrong with what Don Z posted. Well in itself there really is nothing wrong with what he posted. I realize that he was voicing his opinion.


What I find weird about it is that this forum was one created for and about President Obama. We were disucssing President Obama and his new and proposed policies and out of the clear blue Don Z makes a post about former President Bush that really had absolutely nothing to do with not only the forum subject here but with what was being discussed. To me his post was so random. To me his making a random post like that only resonates a hatred that he cannot and will not let go of for our former President. I cannot see any other reason for his making such a random post in this thread.

Be honest with me LN, what would you think if I had made a post in the middle of this forum and in the middle of what was being discussed and said "McKinley was a douchebag?" Wouldn't you find that a bit odd and random? Wouldn't you wonder why I would make such a random statement in a forum that had absolutely nothing to do with McKinley?


Now, can someone who voted for President Obama, one who followed his campaign more thoroughly than I did, maybe explain to me why he made that kind of promise to the American people and now went completely against it?

Well, see, hot-headed Middle Eastern extremists may have taken out TWO of our buildings, but we took out TWO of their countries. See how that works?

But you're right, Osama is still free, and this is largely b/c of a lack of cooperation from the Pakistani government. But that's ok, Pakistan is going to keep f*ing around and they're gonna get a visit from the Big-Bad Wolf.

He compared our previous president who has been out of office less than 2 months to our new president. I don't think anything he said in the post was false except maybe the "I miss" part, but I don't know.



I'd wonder who McKinley was and why you were calling him a douchebag.

DC, give us a break. All you've talked about since the election is that the President is going back on his campaign promises, is no longer talking optimism, has lost his great oratorical skills, needs to start bolstering the people up, quoted a comparison between his election and the plummeting stock market, but then said that you really hope he succeeds.

Oh, and President Bush is a compassionate man? I completely disagree. I think he was so out of touch with the "common man" that he didn't have a clue. When many Americans couldn't afford to fill their gas tanks in order to get to their low-paying jobs, when many Americans were in despair because they didn't think that they could heat their homes over the winter, President Bush was shocked at the price of a gallon of gasoline!! And tell me whatever you will, the fact that it took him days after Katrina to visit New Orleans is no indication of a compassionate man. And, yes, he was on vacation, but he was in Texas, which is pretty close to Lousiana, if I'm not mistaken.

DC, I echo SB's statement. You are caught up in emoting over the Republican Party's loss of the Congress and the White House all within a two year period and frustration due to your failure to understand how that happened. The Nation's demographics have been changing significantly since prior to the 2000 presidential election. That's why most Americans who cast votes in that year's presidential election voted for a Democrat. Except for the interventing variable of 9/11, most voters would have probably voted again for the Democratic presidential candidate. The War in Iraq (which by the way have have expressed support for on this Board) has soured many Americans on the Republican Party's perspective. The rise or fall of this Nation's economy is always accrued to the President who presided over that rise or fall, so President Bush must bear the burden of such an accrual. In addition, many Americans have always laid their woes at the feet of our President. It makes little sense to lament that they do so.

To answer your questions though, wanting to be President is not being President. When you become President, it's a whole new ball game. The rhetoric of campaigns can fade into obscurity when you assume the office. President Obama learned (and continues to learn) that it is politically impractical to try and do many things. Again and again on this Board I have opined that while the President's influence may be significant, his power is limited. It is only the US Congress that can make law and authorize funding. So, a President must be judicious about his dealings with Congress and that may preclude him from fulfilling campaign promises. By the way, Presidents do not have line item veto authority.

SB - Once again you've failed to even address my question. Instead you imply that I am actually looking for this President to fail, you've accused me of "CONSTANTLY" pointing out what I feel he has done wrong, and you've continually reverted back to a prior administration. But you totally avoid my question. Just because I may question the actions of my President does not mean that I am against him or am looking for him to fail. (Sound familiar? I heard you advocate that for the last 8 years )

Thought that I could sincerely provoke an interesting discussion and/or debate, but surprisingly to me, your reply has prevented what I intended to do.

Ollieboy, what the FUCK do you know about what I do or do not understand?

What interesting discussion? What debate? How did my post prevent it? I simply pointed out my interpretation of your earlier posts in this thread.

DC, anyone with even a paucity of comprehension can infer from your posts your level of understanding of anything you post. You are one of the most transparent posters on this Board.

Then I guess that leaves you out ollieboy.

Wow! Snappy retort!

This pissing contest has nothing to do with the President. Everyone needs to get over it.

^ What she said!!

Wasn't it you one of the folks here who was blaming the stock market blues on Obama?

If so, then with your logic, you must credit him with the recent rallies of the last few days.

My God, what day is this when the conservatives of America are now wide-eyed, naive than liberals?

Really for someone that's from Memphis, you took every word as the Gospel? Then again you are from Memphis the Rasslin/Democratic Machine town, so hey what do I know?

Anyway, I think its funny you and the other GOPers are mocking the "Messiah," but weren't you all also so gippity and worshipping Reagan, your savior?

If one understands politics for what it is, and accept the President as a politician, then one isn't as offended.

In short, its one thing to be upset by the process of politics, its another to be upset by policy or whatever. Just don't confuse the trees for the forest.

The GOP got ownage of both the economy and Iraq, and no GOP candidate could have won last year. McCain in fact was their best chance in spite of the stacked odds against them, so thats why I got pissed at GOPers who claim they would have won if they had won a true conservative campaign.

Yeah sorry boys and Appleonya, but Dubya has possibly tainted that brand for years like LBJ did to liberalism or Jimmy Carter to Democrats. God knows how many in this decade has turned many of the future voters and politicians into liberals, or at least Democratic center-left sympathizers.

and I'm with Olivant in that Presidents, like many Governors, need a line-item veto. You know, remember when Clinton and the GOP Congress both pushed for that in the 1990s? Imagine if the GOP, when they totally controlled the government 2003-2007, had actually put some serious effort into true reforms like the line-item veto, instead of trying to pass meaningless Freedom Fries measures or trying to ban gay marriage or whatever nonsense.

Who knows, maybe they still would be in power. I think I gave up on the GOP when they in this decade never bothered to seriously push for alot of their campaign planks that which won them Congress in 1994. You know, Balanced Budget Amendment, Congress Term Limits, Line-Item Veto, good shit.

TIME OUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Obama has not been in office for two months. This is all gonna take time. After all the country began going to hell in a handbasket starting with Reagan. IMHO

It's ridiculous to expect anyone to turn this economy, or anything else, around in less than 60 days. DT is absolutely right. It took a long time to get this way, and it's going to take a long time to get back on our feet.

Oh noes. 1.2% is earmarks!!
Funding applied research to stimulate business growth? The horror!!

55 days in office and already the conservative loons are ready to impeach? Sour grapes. Pure and simple.

Stick a fork in the far right, because their party will never be the same.

Ronnie hit it right on the head about the younger generation being turned off to the right wing rhetoric due the the last administration and their failure to win a war or address the horrendous state of the economy. The "kids" that are in their 20s today will decide the next 3 or 4 Presidents. And they're not likely to collectively vote conservative for a long time coming. If ever. But I turn 50 this year, so I digress.

I campaigned for Obama. I voted for Obama. If he fucks up, I like to think I'll be big enough to admit it, and, if necessary, vote for someone else in 2012.

But can we give the guy his four years first? We just gave eight to a trained chimp.

Saladbar, thank you for replying to my initial post and for giving me some insight as to what some of the money being used in that bill is going towards. At least you gave me an answer.

I saw earlier tonight that the President blew his stack in regards to AIG and is having the treasury secretary do everything in his power to trying to block the $165 MILLION bonuses that they are planning to hand out with the tax money that we've given them for a bailout! Good for him!

In most cases the amounts of the bonuses are legally fixed, and can therefore not be abolished, not even by the president. However, I would think the people receiving these bonuses should refuse them in shame but I obviously don't think like an greedy exec. AT THE VERY LEAST the bonus recipients should have to get in the back of the line with all the company's other secured creditors.

The government was incredibly stupid for giving AIG all this money without the typical sort of checks one would expect to see in the bankruptcy process.

Saladbar, I found that there was another discussion about AIG, bonuses and the baiulout over in another tooic. So I took the liberty of repsonding to your last post over in that topic :

What the F*ck is going on with the economy Topic?

President Barack Obama today announced his intent to nominate Steelers owner Dan Rooney as ambassador to Ireland.

In a White House ceremony this morning, Mr. Obama called Mr. Rooney a "great friend" and cited his efforts to support peace in Ireland.

"I am honored and grateful that such a dedicated and accomplished individual has agreed to serve as the representative of the United States to the Irish people," Mr. Obama said in a prepared statement.

FYI,

Barack Obama will be on Leno on Thursday night. I will try to see it since I am not working on Friday. Problem is, don't know if I can stay awake.


TIS

Please tell me that you mean Leno, TIS!! I don't know who Leon is.

Leon Panetta!

Ha ha ha ha ha LMAO!! Yes, of course I mean Leno. Man, I keep getting more more careless. But, that's hilarious.



TIS

Obama is in California today in O.C. Today he was in Costa Mesa and tomorrow L.A. (and I hear Arnie will greet him).Tickets were/are free and Local news showed many camping out last night. I saw bits and pieces of the townhall meeting. I sure wish I could have gone. I can't wait to retire then I can do whatever the hell I want, whenever the hell I want.

TIS



BHO in OC