DescentBB

Posted: **Mon Oct 11, 2010 4:55 pm**

So Obama's presidency is coming down to thrown books and nude streakers at his speaking events. More severely though, it is the view of how those who count (besides those who count the most...the voters. As I said way back when Obama is nothing more than a empty suit and quite alot like a Tickle ME Elmo doll, filled with pre-recorded messages. Now those in the know are realizing the same thing:

\"With the exception of core Obama Administration loyalists, most politically engaged elites have reached the same conclusions: the White House is in over its head, isolated, insular, arrogant and clueless about how to get along with or persuade members of Congress, the media, the business community or working-class voters. This view is held by Fox News pundits, executives and anchors at the major old-media outlets, reporters who cover the White House, Democratic and Republican congressional leaders and governors, many Democratic business people and lawyers who raised big money for Obama in 2008, and even some members of the Administration just beyond the inner circle. \"

http://www.time.com/time/politics/artic ... 18,00.html

I am almost to the point where I feel sorry for the guy. I feel most bad for all the black americans who thought Obama was going to be something they could take pride in. I wonder how many of them feel like Thelma does when she told Obama she was tired of making excuses for him. I have to wonder who was behind Obama to get him on the road to the presidency? The really cynical side of me sees some white racist bigot promoting Obama just to humiliate all of America's blacks by having the first black president to be no better than a stereo-typical black vaudeville character shucking and jiving with a wash board in hand. To think of all the truly capable black americans we have in this country, it is a shame Obama had to be the first choice.

Posted: **Mon Oct 11, 2010 5:21 pm**

Tc won't like this.

Chamber of Commerce, combining with Karl Rove and his wealthy backers to fund a flood of negative television commercials. Not only is this issue convoluted and far-fetched, but it also distracts from the issues voters care about, frustrating political insiders and alienating struggling citizens (not that many are following such an offbeat story line). Feinting and gibing can't obscure those job numbers.

Posted: **Mon Oct 11, 2010 5:43 pm**

If you can't see the money trail, you don't know where it's going, do you? There is no proof one way or another about what the Chamber of Commerce is doing with their big pot of money. It just has that sour 'smell' to it. As for Rove, he's a very smart slime bag who should be banned from getting involved in any campaign activity at all. He's part of the problem with Washington.

On point to woodchip's thread topic, Obama's lack of leadership is why we haven't seen much 'change'. Bushie built the original bed and Obama got stuck trying to make it. He just hasn't done a very good job of it. Another analogy is that Bush W. and the Republicans started the fire, Obama tried to put it out, but made a lame attempt at it, so he didn't quite succeed, then the homeowner (voters) got mad and turned the job of the putting the fire out back over to the original arsonists thinking that maybe they would be nice and put out the fire.

Posted: **Mon Oct 11, 2010 6:50 pm**

I don't get happy about how even the democrats are abandoning his ship. They jumped on it, not because they believed in his vision but because they believed he could get elected by acting like he had vision. Whether or not he even had one meant nothing to them.
So now that they are going to blame him and jump overboard but only because they are trying to avoid going down with the ship not that they have a better idea for America. They want off Obama's sinking ship so they can be in better position to jump onto the next one that looks like it will float...not that they give a rip about what the cargo is or what the captain has planned once he reaches the destination only that they get the ride they have become accustomed to.

And yes, the repubs would play it the very same way because all rats on a ship think alike. A rat is a rat is a rat.
You want proof of god or evolution? Look no further than Washington DC because people there evolve into soulless wraiths inside of one generation and if that isn't it then it surely is proof that Satan has a place on this earthly plane.

And TC, don't try to defend Obama by talking about transparency for campaign donations. You really don't want to go there in the presence of anyone with a brain and a memory...
And your analogy is so pathetic! As if the democrats and Obama himself as Senator had nothing to do with the current situation?!?! You are sick! Or are you one of those paid campaign 'volunteers'? Just milking that dying cow right up to the end?

Posted: **Tue Oct 12, 2010 11:03 am**

Like I said, Obama was given the bed that the Republicans and Bush/Cheney made sweet and messy love on together and Americans seem to be forgetting that fact now. But unfortunately for Obama, he hasn't done a very good job of changing the sheets or making the bed. So his base is souring on him (kind of like I have).

Herding Cats

But the mainstream media's painting his lack of leadership and policy failures as an indication the voters will be returning in droves to the Republican fold, in the guise of Tea Party idiots or puppets, when they're forgetting who trashed the bed in the first place.

Here Come The Brides

Posted: **Tue Oct 12, 2010 11:19 am**

Sorry TC but the whole mess got started under Clinton when he signed the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act. This repeal made it legal for banks to treat mortgages as derivatives to be bought and sold on whim.

Posted: **Wed Oct 13, 2010 10:40 am**

I agree that Clinton is to blame, but it was REAGAN who really started the whole ball rolling, followed by H.W. Bush. Clinton just kept it going, the DINK, and then Bush Jr. cemented the whole thing. Obama's just putting more icing on the cake instead of dismantling the mess.

Posted: **Wed Oct 13, 2010 10:51 am**

tunnelcat wrote:I agree that Clinton is to blame, but it was REAGAN who really started the whole ball rolling, followed by H.W. Bush. Clinton just kept it going, the DINK, and then Bush Jr. cemented the whole thing. Obama's just putting more icing on the cake instead of dismantling the mess.

Hehe

I admire your resilience TC.

Posted: **Wed Oct 13, 2010 4:36 pm**

tunnelcat wrote:I agree that Clinton is to blame, but it was REAGAN who really started the whole ball rolling, followed by H.W. Bush. Clinton just kept it going, the DINK, and then Bush Jr. cemented the whole thing. Obama's just putting more icing on the cake instead of dismantling the mess.

Actually TC, it was Jimmy "Lusty" Carter who got the ball rolling with the Community Reinvestment Act that he signed into law:

"The Community Reinvestment Act (or CRA, Pub.L. 95-128, title VIII of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1977, 91 Stat. 1147, 12 U.S.C. § 2901 et seq.) is a United States federal law designed to encourage commercial banks and savings associations to meet the needs of borrowers in all segments of their communities, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods.[1][2][3] Congress passed the Act in 1977 to reduce discriminatory credit practices against low-income neighborhoods, a practice known as redlining.[4][5]

The Act requires the appropriate federal financial supervisory agencies to encourage regulated financial institutions to meet the credit needs of the local communities in which they are chartered, consistent with safe and sound operation (Section 802.). To enforce the statute, federal regulatory agencies examine banking institutions for CRA compliance, and take this information into consideration when approving applications for new bank branches or for mergers or acquisitions (Section 804.).[6]"

"The original Act was passed by the 95th United States Congress and signed into law by President Jimmy Carter on October 12, 1977"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act

Nice try TC but obfuscation of facts is not going to cut it here. I suggest, if you really believe what you are posting, that you broaden your info sources beyond Media Matters, MSNBC and the Huffington Post.

Posted: **Wed Oct 13, 2010 4:51 pm**

I'm sure that if you really worked at it, you could connect an unbroken string of events from one president to the next and it'd end up being George Washington's fault.

Posted: **Wed Oct 13, 2010 5:13 pm**

I doubt that, but what the hey…the “everybody is exactly the same” argument is pretty popular now a days, so why not that as well.

Posted: **Wed Oct 13, 2010 5:44 pm**

Why blame it on Jimmy Carter when you can trace it back to the Great Depression and the foundation of Fannie Mae.

Or we can go to 1913 and the creation of the Federal Reserve System.

Posted: **Wed Oct 13, 2010 6:10 pm**

I think everyone can agree that this latest congress and whitehouse is not the first example of officials abusing our trust and making things better for themselves at the expense of all the rest of us.
So with that in mind we all need to stop trying to trace it back and play blame games. It is time to actually do something about it.
No more is the proper focus not who did it last or first!!

Stop making excuses TC unless you think america is on the right track. Stop enabling the dysfunctional abusive assholes and do the right thing for a god damn change!

Posted: **Wed Oct 13, 2010 6:55 pm**

More Presidents should have one of these:

Posted: **Wed Oct 13, 2010 7:55 pm**

7 Steps to Stop Finger-Pointing in a Crisis

Posted: **Wed Oct 13, 2010 9:09 pm**

null0010 wrote:I'm sure that if you really worked at it, you could connect an unbroken string of events from one president to the next and it'd end up being George Washington's fault.

Actually, Adam and Eve screwed it up.

Posted: **Wed Oct 13, 2010 9:32 pm**

Ehhhh…you know what the next step back would be, right?

Posted: **Thu Oct 14, 2010 6:53 am**

Stroodles wrote:
null0010 wrote:I'm sure that if you really worked at it, you could connect an unbroken string of events from one president to the next and it'd end up being George Washington's fault.
Actually, Adam and Eve screwed it up.

It was Eve when she held out the forbidden fruit while being naked and asking Adam if he want some of this. Adam being a man didn't even see the fruit nor cared. He just want some of that.

Posted: **Thu Oct 14, 2010 7:58 am**

So from Obama screwing up to Adam wanting to screw Eve...how a thread can change.

Posted: **Thu Oct 14, 2010 12:43 pm**

Douglas Adams wrote:In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea.

Posted: **Thu Oct 14, 2010 12:53 pm**

null0010 wrote:
Douglas Adams wrote:In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea.

By 13% of the population

Posted: **Thu Oct 14, 2010 1:03 pm**

Heretic, given your \"42\" reference in another thread, I thought you'd appreciate Douglas Adams quotes. No?

Posted: **Thu Oct 14, 2010 1:42 pm**

No, REAGAN is the one who started vilifying government and liberals in general, and he's the one who started gutting it of ANY social benefit for THE PEOPLE. It was his mindset to get RID of all government, not make it better. Reagan gutted welfare for the people, which he was able to do because it had become bloated, expensive and inefficient (which WAS the Dems fault too). HE was the instigator that changed the atmosphere in Washington that eventually enabled CORPORATE welfare in our government. NOW it will be almost impossible to get rid of the infestation.

How long before people in this country realize that all the policies from Reagan onward have been for unfettered and unregulated Capitalism, the bolstering the of military/industrial complex and constant promotion of the \"every man for themselves\" attitude that pervades America, which by the way is also referred to as \"freedom\"? We're not really \"free\" anymore, we're now slaves to all the capitalists of the world who could give a rat's behind about the well being of our society and America itself. And yes, Obama shares the blame for continuing some of it.

If people want to cut government spending, they'd better look at ALL programs, including AND ESPECIALLY the military. If money needs to be saved, cut out a large chunk out of that bloated money sink. They should be prepared when all those social programs that many are depending on are cut or eliminated in the coming government purge. They should be prepared to live with bridges that fall down, roads that are full of holes and natural gas lines that explode in their neighborhoods because the government is broke and corrupt and the private owners of some of this infrastructure refuses to spend the money to keep it repaired. They should also be prepared to pay for privatized fire, police and education. Oh and health care will be out of the reach sooner than later for the common slob to afford as well because Obama screwed that one up too.

People WILL end up on the streets in great masses or be stuck in unlivable-wage jobs because their self-serving corporate masters and others of wealth have deemed their profit margin and bottom line more important. The rest of society will slowly degrade into a 'dog eat dog', crime ridden slave state. It's happened before and it WILL happen again and it may not be reversible this time. The Capitalists have TOO MUCH POWER! It will be chaos for the rest of us because no one in government has the bawls to tax the uber rich and the corporations for their fair share like they should be ponying up or create some laws to keep their lop-sided influence out of the people's government in the first place.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not for a big socialist government, but I don't like the corporate government we now have either. There are things that should be managed by a government. Anything for the 'commons' of our society is best run by those who do not 'profit' from it. Profit motive is rarely altruistic and our government NEEDS to be set up, managed and run for the people's benefit and well being. Reagan decided government was the boogey man and treated it accordingly and now we have what we have.

So who the hell am I supposed to vote for Will? The corporate love children or the extreme crazies? That's all we've got for choices it seems.

Posted: **Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:05 pm**

Foil wrote:Heretic, given your "42" reference in another thread, I thought you'd appreciate Douglas Adams quotes. No?

Has does my reference of a science fiction book disqualify that only 13% of the population get upset with God being referenced as the creator of the universe? Seems to me that 13% of the population are really the religious intolerant.

Posted: **Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:28 pm**

I never said anything about 'disqualifying' your statement.

I was simply pointing out your serious retort to a humorous Douglas Adams quote. It's odd, because you just recently made a reference to the same author.

Did you not recognize the quote, or did you just ignore the fact that it was a humorous statement?

Posted: **Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:45 pm**

tunnelcat wrote:...
So who the hell am I supposed to vote for Will? The corporate love children or the extreme crazies? That's all we've got for choices it seems.

I reject the premise of your question. You continually frame it like that to justify your unwillingness to think outside the mindless party loyalist's box.

So here is the only answer I can give you that is both honest and fits your ridiculous criteria:
You should continue to vote for the government you deserve.

Posted: **Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:53 pm**

Foil wrote:I never said anything about 'disqualifying' your statement.

I was simply pointing out your serious retort to a humorous Douglas Adams quote. It's odd, because you just recently made a reference to the same author.

Did you not recognize the quote, or did you just ignore the fact that it was a humorous statement?

Whoa Are you making assumptions? Tell me it ain't so.

Posted: **Thu Oct 14, 2010 3:44 pm**

Heretic wrote:
Foil wrote:Did you not recognize the quote, or did you just ignore the fact that it was a humorous statement?
Whoa Are you making assumptions? Tell me it ain't so.

Okay: "It ain't so."

I simply asked a question. I made no assumptions whatsoever about the answer.

Posted: **Thu Oct 14, 2010 4:22 pm**

TC wrote:How long before people in this country realize that all the policies from Reagan onward have been for unfettered and unregulated Capitalism, the bolstering the of military/industrial complex and constant promotion of the "every man for themselves" attitude that pervades America, which by the way is also referred to as "freedom"? We're not really "free" anymore, we're now slaves to all the capitalists of the world who could give a rat's behind about the well being of our society and America itself. And yes, Obama shares the blame for continuing some of it.

LOL Tell that to all the people on the street that EXPECT something (besides the basics that government SHOULD provide) from the government. Tell that to all the public sector unions that expect YOU the taxpayer to provide 100% of their medical and pension benefits. Get a clue. Look at the people in France who are on strike because the government wants to raise the retirement age to 62. 62! Jeez!

Posted: **Thu Oct 14, 2010 5:02 pm**

Lol, I guess everyone needs a villain.

Posted: **Mon Oct 18, 2010 12:19 pm**

tunnelcat wrote:Bushie built the original bed and Obama got stuck trying to make it. He just hasn't done a very good job of it. Another analogy is that Bush W. and the Republicans started the fire, Obama tried to put it out, but made a lame attempt at it...

The thing that's wrong with your analogy: you keep acting as though Obama is trying to undo what Bush did. You bought into the campaign rhetoric of "change". Reality is instead of undoing what Bush did, he's still doing most of it, often to an even greater degree.

Virtually every criticism from Woodchip's original post is a carbon copy of the Bush administration. In over its head, isolated, insular, arrogant, clueless about how to get along or persuade others. Let's add to that: overspending in multiple areas while cutting taxes, leading to excessive borrowing; extension of federal power violating personal rights; inability to really set a direction and get stuff done.

I've heard Obama described as "Bush Lite", and I even warned of it before the election. But it turns out I was wrong; to stick with the beer analogy, Obama is more like "Bush Stout" or "Bush IPA". Bush should be described as "Obama Lite".

Posted: **Tue Oct 19, 2010 4:08 am**

Democrats are taking more Foreign money then the Republicans.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing- ... iated-pacs

Posted: **Tue Oct 19, 2010 11:18 am**

Will Robinson wrote: I reject the premise of your question. You continually frame it like that to justify your unwillingness to think outside the mindless party loyalist's box.

So here is the only answer I can give you that is both honest and fits your ridiculous criteria:
You should continue to vote for the government you deserve.

Let's see, the Dems are corporatists, the Repubs worship Corporatism and the Tea Party is an outright crazy extreme extension of the Repubs! What a choice! Pbbbffft!

Yep Heretic, they're all tainted. We NEED campaign money source disclosure laws, but I seriously doubt that putting in Republicans or Tea Baggers this next time will change the status quo (or Dems for that matter).

Lothar, NEVER have I said that Obama is trying to UNDO what Bush did. In fact, he embracing it! Maybe I should have stated that Obama was still sleeping in the bed Bush made for us and he's not even trying to remake it, AT ALL.

Examples:

He hasn't stopped the spying on Americans.

He's been constantly taking out of both sides of his mouth when he says he's going to repeal DADT. So when a court calls DADT unconstitutional and strikes it down, HIS justice department APPEALS the ruling! Talk about shaking someone's hand while poking them in the eye!

He's still fighting the 2 illegal wars that he promised he would cut back on if elected and now he's actually dug us in deeper with the escalating fight against radical groups like al Qaeda in Africa, Asia and the Middle East.

He's still trying to put HIS favorite candidates in office during elections by trying to buy off any political challengers, just like any good ole' politician would.

He's still using executive privilege far beyond it's intended purpose for things that should be transparent in our government.

He demurred to BP during the Gulf crisis AND STILL IS!

His Obamacare is just a gift to PRIVATE health insurance companies!

On And On!

Posted: **Tue Oct 19, 2010 11:33 am**

Neither party is capable of putting forward a real leader anymore. So everyone should vote for a completely independent individual, even if they think that person is completely off their rocker loony. At this point, someone who is a crazed lunatic conspiracy theorist probably couldn't do much worse of a job in Washington. Fight poison with poison, even if they are insane putting a large number of independents in Washington will still help break up the corporate funded party stranglehold and it might just convince a few people with genuine leadership ability to try their hand at it.

Posted: **Tue Oct 19, 2010 2:55 pm**

Wow! I agree with Krom.

Posted: **Tue Oct 19, 2010 3:21 pm**

Krom wrote:Neither party is capable of putting forward a real leader anymore. So everyone should vote for a completely independent individual, even if they think that person is completely off their rocker loony. At this point, someone who is a crazed lunatic conspiracy theorist probably couldn't do much worse of a job in Washington. Fight poison with poison, even if they are insane putting a large number of independents in Washington will still help break up the corporate funded party stranglehold and it might just convince a few people with genuine leadership ability to try their hand at it.

But that is impossible Krom because TC says there are only 3 candidates in every election: repubs, dems and tea partiers. /sarcastic poke in TC's eye

Posted: **Tue Oct 19, 2010 4:13 pm**

tunnelcat wrote:Lothar, NEVER have I said that Obama is trying to UNDO what Bush did. In fact, he embracing it! Maybe I should have stated that Obama was still sleeping in the bed Bush made for us and he's not even trying to remake it, AT ALL.

That would be a much better way to state it, yes. What you said before was that he was trying to remake the bed and/or put out the fire but doing a bad job, when the reality is more like he's pouring gasoline on the bed as it burns. He's not trying to "change" Bush's policies but failing, he's simply continuing them.

Until Obama is out of office, I'm going to keep saying "I told you so" about him being a third term of Bush.

Posted: **Tue Oct 19, 2010 4:19 pm**

I don’t know, at least Bush never blamed the people who are the victims of something for being the cause.

Coughcoughhealthcarereformcoughcough

Posted: **Tue Oct 19, 2010 4:51 pm**

Will Robinson wrote:But that is impossible Krom because TC says there are only 3 candidates in every election: repubs, dems and tea partiers. /sarcastic poke in TC's eye

Dollars to donuts, these will be our 2 main choices for Pres. in 2012. Unless there's a miracle and someone comes forward to challenge these 2 that isn't either an idiot or ideologue.

Posted: **Wed Oct 20, 2010 7:51 am**

Well lets take a look TC. The liberal press painted Obama to be the next coming of christ and to be the great savior of our country. Turned out to be the biggest lie since Clinton said, \"I never had sex with that girl, not once...not ever\".

The same press that got the dupes ensorcelled into the Obama myth, want you to believe Palin will be the worst president ever. So tell me, are you going to be rube'd twice?

DescentBB

State of Affairs et tu

State of Affairs et tu

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re: