StreetScooby 5 #26 December 9, 2008 Quote Any thoughts? +1We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #27 December 9, 2008 Quote The bottom line is I hope Obama does such a good job that i will want to vote for him in 4 years. +1We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #28 December 9, 2008 Quote rhymes with Llama Rickover gave poetry courses, too? We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #29 December 9, 2008 Quote Kallend - rear end, tax and spend ...apparently advanced poetry courses We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #30 December 9, 2008 Quote at this point there is NO WAY he can do worse than what we have right now......... Sure there is. He could go and sing that camp fire song with the Taliban, Iranians, Somalians, and the list goes on.We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #31 December 9, 2008 Quote The Politico article above indicates one way this might be accomplished, the "oh man, Obama is really pissing those stupid liberals off!" angle. That allows conservatives to both demonstrate their contempt for liberals while simultaneously supporting a liberal president. Dude, sometimes you simply think too much, IMO.We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skycop 0 #32 December 9, 2008 'roooby doooo........ what the heck does +1 mean? "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #33 December 9, 2008 I agreed with the OP.We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallingOsh 0 #34 December 9, 2008 QuoteWhat makes me most optimistic about the above article is this line: "Liberals are growing increasingly nervous . . . ." The article is from Politico, a somewhat right-leaning news organization. While most people support the Obama presidency now, there are some conservatives who will find it very hard to do so - unless they can find some way to distance themselves from the liberals who form the core of Obama's constituency. The Politico article above indicates one way this might be accomplished, the "oh man, Obama is really pissing those stupid liberals off!" angle. That allows conservatives to both demonstrate their contempt for liberals while simultaneously supporting a liberal president. And yes, this means even more arguing and rhetoric. But it also means that even conservatives are starting to "own" some of Obama's positions, which bodes well for both sides being able to work together in the next administration. Maybe the right are raising eye brows because his post election rhetoric is actually more in line with what we believe. He kept Gates. He's not pursuing charges against those who participated in "harsh interrogations." He supports a compromise on domestic phone taps. He's rethinking an appeal of the Bush tax cuts. What would be interesting to me is if the left continues to sing his praises if he keeps going against what you've preached on these boards. -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #35 December 9, 2008 Quote P.S. Kallend and others.......stop bustin' rhymes in my thread!!!!!! he's right, it hurts my head, and I'm seeing read ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Muenkel 0 #36 December 9, 2008 Just a few thoughts: I see him pissing off the radical left, not the regular left of center. He will throw the radical left a bone or two. Now being briefed daily on top secret intel, he's getting a better understanding of the true state of the union. The populace do not receive these high level briefings. He's already running for 2012. Watch for his Supreme Court nominations. _________________________________________ Chris Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #37 December 9, 2008 QuoteQuoteAnd that has to do with what? I've seen several articles and video clips of the far left whining (but then again, that's what they do) about how Obama is leaving them out. Whining from the left? Did you always have trouble telling left from right? Just look at the sore loser posts we've had right here. Not to mention the sore winner postsMike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #38 December 9, 2008 QuoteHere is the biography of the author that wrote the article that you did not cite: QuoteBefore moving to Florida, Carol was a news assistant at The New York Times and a freelance writer. She wrote about important social phenomena in the Times, such as drunk dialing and tanorexia. She has also written for Newsweek and Newsday. Now it's been picked up by MSNBC - is that valid enough for you now, or are you going to check the news anchors' resumes and see if they meet with your approval?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skycop 0 #39 December 9, 2008 See, Even MSNBC is turning on him so to speak. Have no fear, Keith Olberman is coming to the rescue.........(maybe) If MSNBC runs anything remotely critical of Obama then the world as we know it may be coming to an end......... "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,006 #40 December 9, 2008 >Even MSNBC is turning on him so to speak. I rest my case. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
caress 0 #41 December 9, 2008 JHC - he hasn't DONE anything yet - he's not even the fucking president yet, how can he possibly have done so much wrong already? I love this shit. The country elects an asshole, (Bush), let's him fuck up, RE-ELECTS him again so he can fuck up even more, and then they bash the new guy before he even gets into office? wow...... let's see in 4 years what everyone thinks of Obama, - at this point there is NO WAY he can do worse than what we have right now......... --------------------------------------------------- +1"I love it when a plan comes together....." -John "Hannibal" Smith ------------------------------------------------------ +1 Thank Goodness that we have someone who is willing to gather as much knowlege as he can before he decides how to proceed-Maybe actually in an educated manner that benefits the entire country!-Caress I've learned.... That being kind is more important than being right. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #42 December 9, 2008 QuoteJHC - he hasn't DONE anything yet - he's not even the fucking president yet, how can he possibly have done so much wrong already? I love this shit. The country elects an asshole, (Bush), let's him fuck up, RE-ELECTS him again so he can fuck up even more, and then they bash the new guy before he even gets into office? wow...... let's see in 4 years what everyone thinks of Obama, - at this point there is NO WAY he can do worse than what we have right now......... --------------------------------------------------- yes he can, he could cause the colapse of the united states, he could be responsible for many things worse than any other president in our history, lets hope he doesn't fuck anything up and does a good job. hope he doesn't do thishttp://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=78330 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites tkhayes 348 #43 December 9, 2008 Quotehope he doesn't do thishttp://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=78330 not sure why anyone would actually read anything into articles like that - there are equally dozens of articles about GWB, alleging cocaine abuse, alcoholism, guiding the Whitehouse by the Bible, being a drunk, catering to his cronies, gutting the Constitution and generally being STUPID.... but no one paid any attention to those articles. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites FallingOsh 0 #44 December 9, 2008 QuoteQuotehope he doesn't do thishttp://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=78330 not sure why anyone would actually read anything into articles like that - there are equally dozens of articles about GWB, alleging cocaine abuse, alcoholism, guiding the Whitehouse by the Bible, being a drunk, catering to his cronies, gutting the Constitution and generally being STUPID.... but no one paid any attention to those articles. Actually, that sounds like a list of talking points for more than a few in this forum. -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nerdgirl 0 #45 December 9, 2008 Quote hope he doesn't do thishttp://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=78330 Quote Capitalism seeks prosperity; socialism seeks equity. Freedom increases as prosperity increases. It would be interesting to plot “freedom” (of which there are quantitative & semi-quantitative measures) versus prosperity (one may use per capita income *&* GDP as stand-in variables). These folks did one analysis (they self-identify as advocates of "libertarian and free market liberal ideology"). Depending on how it’s done Estonia or Ireland come out on top. Here's another (p. 4). Again Ireland has most political freedom & most economic freedom. Japan is another one that rates high on political freedom and economic freedom scales, yet per Mr. lamb's description it would fit more as a "socialist" state. Singapore is an interesting out-lier. How far toward what the cited Op-Ed by Mr. Lamb suggests is characteristic of a socialist government do Ireland or Estonia look like? Otoh, prosperity in some states is linked to the price of oil. There is “a literal correlation that could be measured and graphed—between the price of oil and the pace, scope, and sustainability of political freedoms and [market-based] economic reforms,” i.e., lower oil $ =’s more freedom around the world and lower price of oil = less prosperity for some states. “The First Law of Petropolitics posits the following: The price of oil and the pace of freedom always move in opposite directions in oil-rich petrolist states. According to the First Law of Petropolitics, the higher the average global crude oil price rises, the more free speech, free press, free and fair elections, an independent judiciary, the rule of law, and independent political parties are eroded. And these negative trends are reinforced by the fact that the higher the price goes, the less petrolist leaders are sensitive to what the world thinks or says about them. Conversely, according to the First Law of Petropolitics, the lower the price of oil, the more petrolist countries are forced to move toward a political system and a society that is more transparent, more sensitive to opposition voices, and more focused on building the legal and educational structures that will maximize their people’s ability, both men’s and women’s, to compete, start new companies, and attract investments from abroad. The lower the price of crude oil falls, the more petrolist leaders are sensitive to what outside forces think of them.” Now democracy does not = freedom … nor does correlation = causality. But doesn’t it make you go “hmmm?” (Okay, there’s probably some out there who are going “yawn.”)I disagree with Friedman’s conclusions from his observed correlations. But they do show that Mr. Lamb’s claims are problematic. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #46 December 9, 2008 Quote yes he can, he could cause the colapse of the united states, he could be responsible for many things worse than any other president in our history, it's pretty hard for the President to single handedly cause the collapse of our nation. Most of the actions that Bush did were with the approval of the Democrats in the Senate, particularly after 9/11 when they were collectively sheep. For that reason, the President alone doesn't get all the blame. We know from past history that the GOP is unlikely to be so easily cowed. They'll resist admitting the sun will rise tomorrow, nevermind agree to a plan that will destroy the country. I can't see any viable scenario by which your fears would be realized. If he continues the bailout trend started by Bush/Paulson, it could spiral out, but I'd say this is akin to blaming Hoover for even Coolidge's failures. Bush shouldn't have cut taxes and raised spending in such dramatic fashion. It tied our hands in deal with the current situation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Erroll 80 #47 December 10, 2008 Quote Obama,....... yes he can, Now why does that sound so familiar...? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites riddler 0 #48 December 10, 2008 QuoteAnd that has to do with what? It's an opinion piece by someone that doesn't have the qualifications to accurately gauge public reaction. Anyone can make a statement like "the liberals are running scared" and cite a few bloggers to try to prove your point, but if you want to be believable, you should have a resume with some real political journalism experience, not coffee-shop gossip about what teenagers are doing after school. Really, I was just citing your source, since you failed to do so.Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skycop 0 #49 December 10, 2008 Quote Here is the biography of the author that wrote the article that you did not cite: The next time I dare post anything remotely critical of Obama, I'll make sure the author is properly vetted. Quote I was just citing your source, since you failed to do so. I did'nt fail to do anything, you COMPLETELY missed my point. It is a freakin' shame that some of Obama's far-left base MAY start to turn on him BEFORE one day in office. This is one article that contains a theme I've seen lately from various media outlets. "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites marks2065 0 #50 December 10, 2008 QuoteQuotehope he doesn't do thishttp://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=78330 not sure why anyone would actually read anything into articles like that - there are equally dozens of articles about GWB, alleging cocaine abuse, alcoholism, guiding the Whitehouse by the Bible, being a drunk, catering to his cronies, gutting the Constitution and generally being STUPID.... but no one paid any attention to those articles. i wasn't saying anything about the article other than I hope this is not the path Obama wants to take. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 2 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
tkhayes 348 #43 December 9, 2008 Quotehope he doesn't do thishttp://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=78330 not sure why anyone would actually read anything into articles like that - there are equally dozens of articles about GWB, alleging cocaine abuse, alcoholism, guiding the Whitehouse by the Bible, being a drunk, catering to his cronies, gutting the Constitution and generally being STUPID.... but no one paid any attention to those articles. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallingOsh 0 #44 December 9, 2008 QuoteQuotehope he doesn't do thishttp://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=78330 not sure why anyone would actually read anything into articles like that - there are equally dozens of articles about GWB, alleging cocaine abuse, alcoholism, guiding the Whitehouse by the Bible, being a drunk, catering to his cronies, gutting the Constitution and generally being STUPID.... but no one paid any attention to those articles. Actually, that sounds like a list of talking points for more than a few in this forum. -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #45 December 9, 2008 Quote hope he doesn't do thishttp://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=78330 Quote Capitalism seeks prosperity; socialism seeks equity. Freedom increases as prosperity increases. It would be interesting to plot “freedom” (of which there are quantitative & semi-quantitative measures) versus prosperity (one may use per capita income *&* GDP as stand-in variables). These folks did one analysis (they self-identify as advocates of "libertarian and free market liberal ideology"). Depending on how it’s done Estonia or Ireland come out on top. Here's another (p. 4). Again Ireland has most political freedom & most economic freedom. Japan is another one that rates high on political freedom and economic freedom scales, yet per Mr. lamb's description it would fit more as a "socialist" state. Singapore is an interesting out-lier. How far toward what the cited Op-Ed by Mr. Lamb suggests is characteristic of a socialist government do Ireland or Estonia look like? Otoh, prosperity in some states is linked to the price of oil. There is “a literal correlation that could be measured and graphed—between the price of oil and the pace, scope, and sustainability of political freedoms and [market-based] economic reforms,” i.e., lower oil $ =’s more freedom around the world and lower price of oil = less prosperity for some states. “The First Law of Petropolitics posits the following: The price of oil and the pace of freedom always move in opposite directions in oil-rich petrolist states. According to the First Law of Petropolitics, the higher the average global crude oil price rises, the more free speech, free press, free and fair elections, an independent judiciary, the rule of law, and independent political parties are eroded. And these negative trends are reinforced by the fact that the higher the price goes, the less petrolist leaders are sensitive to what the world thinks or says about them. Conversely, according to the First Law of Petropolitics, the lower the price of oil, the more petrolist countries are forced to move toward a political system and a society that is more transparent, more sensitive to opposition voices, and more focused on building the legal and educational structures that will maximize their people’s ability, both men’s and women’s, to compete, start new companies, and attract investments from abroad. The lower the price of crude oil falls, the more petrolist leaders are sensitive to what outside forces think of them.” Now democracy does not = freedom … nor does correlation = causality. But doesn’t it make you go “hmmm?” (Okay, there’s probably some out there who are going “yawn.”)I disagree with Friedman’s conclusions from his observed correlations. But they do show that Mr. Lamb’s claims are problematic. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #46 December 9, 2008 Quote yes he can, he could cause the colapse of the united states, he could be responsible for many things worse than any other president in our history, it's pretty hard for the President to single handedly cause the collapse of our nation. Most of the actions that Bush did were with the approval of the Democrats in the Senate, particularly after 9/11 when they were collectively sheep. For that reason, the President alone doesn't get all the blame. We know from past history that the GOP is unlikely to be so easily cowed. They'll resist admitting the sun will rise tomorrow, nevermind agree to a plan that will destroy the country. I can't see any viable scenario by which your fears would be realized. If he continues the bailout trend started by Bush/Paulson, it could spiral out, but I'd say this is akin to blaming Hoover for even Coolidge's failures. Bush shouldn't have cut taxes and raised spending in such dramatic fashion. It tied our hands in deal with the current situation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Erroll 80 #47 December 10, 2008 Quote Obama,....... yes he can, Now why does that sound so familiar...? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riddler 0 #48 December 10, 2008 QuoteAnd that has to do with what? It's an opinion piece by someone that doesn't have the qualifications to accurately gauge public reaction. Anyone can make a statement like "the liberals are running scared" and cite a few bloggers to try to prove your point, but if you want to be believable, you should have a resume with some real political journalism experience, not coffee-shop gossip about what teenagers are doing after school. Really, I was just citing your source, since you failed to do so.Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skycop 0 #49 December 10, 2008 Quote Here is the biography of the author that wrote the article that you did not cite: The next time I dare post anything remotely critical of Obama, I'll make sure the author is properly vetted. Quote I was just citing your source, since you failed to do so. I did'nt fail to do anything, you COMPLETELY missed my point. It is a freakin' shame that some of Obama's far-left base MAY start to turn on him BEFORE one day in office. This is one article that contains a theme I've seen lately from various media outlets. "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #50 December 10, 2008 QuoteQuotehope he doesn't do thishttp://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=78330 not sure why anyone would actually read anything into articles like that - there are equally dozens of articles about GWB, alleging cocaine abuse, alcoholism, guiding the Whitehouse by the Bible, being a drunk, catering to his cronies, gutting the Constitution and generally being STUPID.... but no one paid any attention to those articles. i wasn't saying anything about the article other than I hope this is not the path Obama wants to take. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
