Conquer Club

ObamaCare - exchanges ,report your states options!

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Re: Socialized Healthcare

Postby PLAYER57832 on Tue May 11, 2010 10:51 am

thegreekdog wrote:A couple of things:

(1) You seem to think there is a growing problem with hating the person rather than the policies. I have seen this problem myself from Bill Clinton to GW Bush (especially him) to Barack Obama. I don't think this is a growing problem. I think it has been a continuous problem throughout history. A lot of people hated Abraham Lincoln, the man. So, it makes me wonder why you think this is a growing problem right now. And I think the answer is that you have been led to believe it is a growing problem right now because the current president and his administration have made it clear that to criticize the president's policies is to be either a radical conservative or a racist. So, when someone criticizes the president himself, rather than saying, "Yeah, they're right," like you did with President Bush, you say, "You're being unreasonable/radical/racist."

The difference now is the volume and the tone. People have always disliked politicians, both as individuals AND for their policies. What is new is that the two are so rarely distinguished. Also, to be honest, a lot of it was always rhetoric. I would sit in on some of the Republican discussions in CA, when Reagan was in office (yep, I was a young Republican back then) and you would hear them talk about each other in public one way, but privately.. they got along. Not all of course, they had their own differences personally. However, they did not mix the two.

Today, it is different. When a Republican finds out that a colleague's wife has cancer and expresses condolences, he is likely to be chastized.

Lincoln is not the best example. Times were different then, but we were also in the midst of the most brutal war in our history. Comparing attitudes today to then is plain scary. And that is my point. We should not be at war today, internally, and yet, according to primarily Republican politicians, we are. It is no cooincidence.
thegreekdog wrote:
(2) What exactly has President Obama done to create openness about his use of the Patriot Act? The answer is nothing. And this is why I think you drink the Obama Kool Aid. Because you type things out here that aren't true. I can respect your opinion on healthcare, and that's fine. I cannot accept that there has been any positive difference between Bush's Patriot Act and Obama's Patriot Act. In fact, some of my more libertarian friends have indicated that the Obama administration is actually worse than the Bush adminsitration when it comes to domestic intelligence gathering. While I take what those two dudes say with a grain of salt, there is no more openness now than there was 4 years ago.

I did say I disliked his continuing the Patriot Act. He has, however opened many other records that Bush, etc sealed. He has not been as open as people hoped, but he is just a bit better than Bush. That's not saying much, mind you.
thegreekdog wrote:(3) Time will tell. I agree with you on this. I still think time will tell with President Bush. Bush the man was certainly prone to saying stupid things and should not have gotten us involved in a war with Iraq. However, I will still remain confident that he was unfairly criticized for a lot of things. On the other hand, I think President Obama is unfairly criticized on some things, while not being criticized enough on other things. And this is because the things that President Bush was most criticized for (the wars, the Patriot Act) are things that President Obama has not changed and has no plans to change. That's why I do not understand your (and others') loyalty to this president. The only thing I can think of is political party affiliation, which is completely unacceptable in my mind.

I actually think Cheney was the greater villain in the Bush administration. But, Bush was the head. He could have controlled Cheney, but decided not to. Well, the powers that put him into office did so, in large part, due to Cheney. I am not going to get into more detail there.

As for my "loyalty", I have said again and again that I refrain from villifying the guy. It is pretty telling that even you wish to equate that with "loyalty" and "unwavering support". Very telling indeed... and a prime example of the kind of ultra-partisenship of which I spoke.

As for party, I have said before and will say it again, my party affiliation is simply the best of 2 poor choices. My registration has to do with practical matters, mostly the primary in which I wish to vote.
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Socialized Healthcare

Postby thegreekdog on Tue May 11, 2010 11:00 am

PLAYER57832 wrote:The difference now is the volume and the tone. People have always disliked politicians, both as individuals AND for their policies. What is new is that the two are so rarely distinguished. Also, to be honest, a lot of it was always rhetoric. I would sit in on some of the Republican discussions in CA, when Reagan was in office (yep, I was a young Republican back then) and you would hear them talk about each other in public one way, but privately.. they got along. Not all of course, they had their own differences personally. However, they did not mix the two.


Ignoring anyone prior to Reagan is fine. I can do that. The press was different back in Lincoln's day as well. In any event, I would say the volume and tone of personal criticism under Presidents Clinton and Bush II were significantly worse than any personal criticism of President Obama. President Clinton was harrassed on a daily basis. A crowd watching President Bush II leave the White House raised their middle fingers in salute. That's my lasting impression of the volume and tone of criticism under the Bush administration.

PLAYER57832 wrote:He has, however opened many other records that Bush, etc sealed. He has not been as open as people hoped, but he is just a bit better than Bush. That's not saying much, mind you.


Like what? I have not seen these things.

PLAYER57832 wrote:As for my "loyalty", I have said again and again that I refrain from villifying the guy. It is pretty telling that even you wish to equate that with "loyalty" and "unwavering support". Very telling indeed... and a prime example of the kind of ultra-partisenship of which I spoke.


You do refrain from villifying the guy. So do I. And yet I consider you to have unwavering support and loyalty, and I do not have unwavering support and loyalty. Because I criticize his policies and you defend them. In fact, you defend all of his policies. I have not read any criticism really. So, I think my characterization of you is pretty fair, all things considered.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7246
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Socialized Healthcare

Postby PLAYER57832 on Tue May 11, 2010 11:28 am

thegreekdog wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:The difference now is the volume and the tone. People have always disliked politicians, both as individuals AND for their policies. What is new is that the two are so rarely distinguished. Also, to be honest, a lot of it was always rhetoric. I would sit in on some of the Republican discussions in CA, when Reagan was in office (yep, I was a young Republican back then) and you would hear them talk about each other in public one way, but privately.. they got along. Not all of course, they had their own differences personally. However, they did not mix the two.


Ignoring anyone prior to Reagan is fine. I can do that. The press was different back in Lincoln's day as well. In any event, I would say the volume and tone of personal criticism under Presidents Clinton and Bush II were significantly worse than any personal criticism of President Obama. President Clinton was harrassed on a daily basis. A crowd watching President Bush II leave the White House raised their middle fingers in salute. That's my lasting impression of the volume and tone of criticism under the Bush administration.

I don't ignore anything before Reagan, but I was involved from Reagan on, before is just history to me.
thegreekdog wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:He has, however opened many other records that Bush, etc sealed. He has not been as open as people hoped, but he is just a bit better than Bush. That's not saying much, mind you.


Like what? I have not seen these things.

I will get back to you on that .

thegreekdog wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:As for my "loyalty", I have said again and again that I refrain from villifying the guy. It is pretty telling that even you wish to equate that with "loyalty" and "unwavering support". Very telling indeed... and a prime example of the kind of ultra-partisenship of which I spoke.


You do refrain from villifying the guy. So do I. And yet I consider you to have unwavering support and loyalty, and I do not have unwavering support and loyalty. Because I criticize his policies and you defend them. In fact, you defend all of his policies. I have not read any criticism really. So, I think my characterization of you is pretty fair, all things considered.

I see, so you believe I said I liked the Patriot act?
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Socialized Healthcare

Postby thegreekdog on Tue May 11, 2010 12:11 pm

No, I believe you said "I don't like the Patriot Act, but at least Obama's being transparent." I say, "so what?"

"Yeah, we wiretapped your kid's school. So what? At least we told you we did it. Did Bush do that? Nuh uh."
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7246
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Socialized Healthcare

Postby PLAYER57832 on Tue May 11, 2010 12:21 pm

thegreekdog wrote:No, I believe you said "I don't like the Patriot Act, but at least Obama's being transparent." I say, "so what?"

transparent in other areas.
Here is one, recent, example:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter ... ased-pote/

There are more, but the point is that while Obama has not been as open as many would hope, it has been far more open than Bush. This despite continuing to use the Patriot Act.

thegreekdog wrote:"Yeah, we wiretapped your kid's school. So what? At least we told you we did it. Did Bush do that? Nuh uh."

I believe that was the Philadephia school administration, not Obama.
Last edited by PLAYER57832 on Tue May 11, 2010 12:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Socialized Healthcare

Postby thegreekdog on Tue May 11, 2010 12:22 pm

PLAYER57832 wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:No, I believe you said "I don't like the Patriot Act, but at least Obama's being transparent." I say, "so what?"

transparent in other areas.
thegreekdog wrote:"Yeah, we wiretapped your kid's school. So what? At least we told you we did it. Did Bush do that? Nuh uh."

I believe that was the Philadephia school administration, not Obama.


I wasn't being specific to a particular incident. "Yeah, we wiretapped your kid's cell phone" could also suffice.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7246
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Socialized Healthcare

Postby PopeBenXVI on Tue May 11, 2010 9:51 pm

And don't forget all the jobs Obama saved or created via the stimulus. Being that he is so open I am sure he will let us know whether they were saved jobs or created jobs once he finds out. Honest Abe-Obama
Image

semen est sanguis Christianorum
Major PopeBenXVI
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 12:03 am
Location: citta del Vaticano

Re: Socialized Healthcare

Postby PLAYER57832 on Wed May 12, 2010 7:14 am

thegreekdog wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:No, I believe you said "I don't like the Patriot Act, but at least Obama's being transparent." I say, "so what?"

transparent in other areas.
thegreekdog wrote:"Yeah, we wiretapped your kid's school. So what? At least we told you we did it. Did Bush do that? Nuh uh."

I believe that was the Philadephia school administration, not Obama.


I wasn't being specific to a particular incident. "Yeah, we wiretapped your kid's cell phone" could also suffice.

So were you speaking about anything that the Obama administration (or the Bush, for that matter) has actually done?
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Socialized Healthcare

Postby thegreekdog on Wed May 12, 2010 3:24 pm

PLAYER57832 wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:No, I believe you said "I don't like the Patriot Act, but at least Obama's being transparent." I say, "so what?"

transparent in other areas.
thegreekdog wrote:"Yeah, we wiretapped your kid's school. So what? At least we told you we did it. Did Bush do that? Nuh uh."

I believe that was the Philadephia school administration, not Obama.


I wasn't being specific to a particular incident. "Yeah, we wiretapped your kid's cell phone" could also suffice.

So were you speaking about anything that the Obama administration (or the Bush, for that matter) has actually done?


Yes.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7246
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Socialized Healthcare

Postby PLAYER57832 on Wed May 12, 2010 5:01 pm

thegreekdog wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:No, I believe you said "I don't like the Patriot Act, but at least Obama's being transparent." I say, "so what?"

transparent in other areas.
thegreekdog wrote:"Yeah, we wiretapped your kid's school. So what? At least we told you we did it. Did Bush do that? Nuh uh."

I believe that was the Philadephia school administration, not Obama.


I wasn't being specific to a particular incident. "Yeah, we wiretapped your kid's cell phone" could also suffice.

So were you speaking about anything that the Obama administration (or the Bush, for that matter) has actually done?


Yes.

Well then, what?
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Socialized Healthcare

Postby thegreekdog on Wed May 12, 2010 5:49 pm

Well then, let's say Presidents Bush and Obama do the same things. Let's say President Bush didn't tell us what he was doing. Let's say President Obama does tell us what he's doing (I don't think he is, but I'm saying this for the sake of argument). I see no concrete difference. They are both doing bad things. So just because President Obama says he's tapping your child's cell phone, does not make him any better of a president in this regard than President Bush.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7246
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Socialized Healthcare

Postby PLAYER57832 on Thu May 13, 2010 9:46 am

thegreekdog wrote:Well then, let's say Presidents Bush and Obama do the same things. Let's say President Bush didn't tell us what he was doing. Let's say President Obama does tell us what he's doing (I don't think he is, but I'm saying this for the sake of argument). I see no concrete difference. They are both doing bad things. So just because President Obama says he's tapping your child's cell phone, does not make him any better of a president in this regard than President Bush.

The part I turned blue is the critical point.

A hypothetical is not the same as reality, and that is the point. Bush DID those things. Obama, so far has not.
On other fronts... Gabon dug up a good article regarding Haliburton.

I am not saying Obama is above criticism, by a long shot! I am just not going to be party to a "bash session". It does no one any good to exaggerate or toss undeserved slurs, particularly not the ones tossing them.

So, if Obama is wiretapping kids.. .let's hear it. Else... its mud slinging and not worthy discussion. let's not try to emulate lionz
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Socialized Healthcare

Postby thegreekdog on Thu May 13, 2010 5:20 pm

PLAYER57832 wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:Well then, let's say Presidents Bush and Obama do the same things. Let's say President Bush didn't tell us what he was doing. Let's say President Obama does tell us what he's doing (I don't think he is, but I'm saying this for the sake of argument). I see no concrete difference. They are both doing bad things. So just because President Obama says he's tapping your child's cell phone, does not make him any better of a president in this regard than President Bush.

The part I turned blue is the critical point.

A hypothetical is not the same as reality, and that is the point. Bush DID those things. Obama, so far has not.
On other fronts... Gabon dug up a good article regarding Haliburton.

I am not saying Obama is above criticism, by a long shot! I am just not going to be party to a "bash session". It does no one any good to exaggerate or toss undeserved slurs, particularly not the ones tossing them.

So, if Obama is wiretapping kids.. .let's hear it. Else... its mud slinging and not worthy discussion. let's not try to emulate lionz


No, but President Obama is doing the same things as President Bush is. Seriously. He really and truly is.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7246
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Socialized Healthcare

Postby PLAYER57832 on Thu May 13, 2010 5:50 pm

thegreekdog wrote:
No, but President Obama is doing the same things as President Bush is. Seriously. He really and truly is.

In many cases, I am quite sure you are correct.
In fact, I would say I KNOW you are correct. It is a function of politics today.

What's most frustrating, though, is not so much that Obama is doing the same things, its that so many think the solution is for Republicans to stonewall any real change, and we need to continue on this path of supporting the wealthy while largely ignoring the rest of us. We get thrown a couple of "bones", like a small tax cut (during a recession, when we really should be paying more..), but meanwhile, all we get is talk, talk, talk about wallstreet changes, mortgage relief, etc.
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Socialized Healthcare

Postby thegreekdog on Thu May 13, 2010 5:53 pm

PLAYER57832 wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
No, but President Obama is doing the same things as President Bush is. Seriously. He really and truly is.

In many cases, I am quite sure you are correct.
In fact, I would say I KNOW you are correct. It is a function of politics today.

What's most frustrating, though, is not so much that Obama is doing the same things, its that so many think the solution is for Republicans to stonewall any real change, and we need to continue on this path of supporting the wealthy while largely ignoring the rest of us. We get thrown a couple of "bones", like a small tax cut (during a recession, when we really should be paying more..), but meanwhile, all we get is talk, talk, talk about wallstreet changes, mortgage relief, etc.


I'm talking strictly about the Patriot Act. I'm not talking about economic policies.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7246
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Socialized Healthcare

Postby PLAYER57832 on Thu May 13, 2010 6:00 pm

thegreekdog wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
No, but President Obama is doing the same things as President Bush is. Seriously. He really and truly is.

In many cases, I am quite sure you are correct.
In fact, I would say I KNOW you are correct. It is a function of politics today.

What's most frustrating, though, is not so much that Obama is doing the same things, its that so many think the solution is for Republicans to stonewall any real change, and we need to continue on this path of supporting the wealthy while largely ignoring the rest of us. We get thrown a couple of "bones", like a small tax cut (during a recession, when we really should be paying more..), but meanwhile, all we get is talk, talk, talk about wallstreet changes, mortgage relief, etc.


I'm talking strictly about the Patriot Act. I'm not talking about economic policies.

I was referring to the entire "kit and caboodle"
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Socialized Healthcare

Postby thegreekdog on Thu May 13, 2010 6:03 pm

PLAYER57832 wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
No, but President Obama is doing the same things as President Bush is. Seriously. He really and truly is.

In many cases, I am quite sure you are correct.
In fact, I would say I KNOW you are correct. It is a function of politics today.

What's most frustrating, though, is not so much that Obama is doing the same things, its that so many think the solution is for Republicans to stonewall any real change, and we need to continue on this path of supporting the wealthy while largely ignoring the rest of us. We get thrown a couple of "bones", like a small tax cut (during a recession, when we really should be paying more..), but meanwhile, all we get is talk, talk, talk about wallstreet changes, mortgage relief, etc.


I'm talking strictly about the Patriot Act. I'm not talking about economic policies.

I was referring to the entire "kit and caboodle"


I don't think we can judge President Obama with respect to economics yet (except for a few things I've already identified - namely the cost-benefit of the job creation act and the wanton spending of money that we don't have). I think some parts of his job creation act were really effective. Other parts, not so much. I disagree with the bailouts, but a Republican president would have done the same thing, so I can't really have a beef with President Obama on that one. I'm kind of disappointed about his lack of action on gay rights and the Patriot Act, but he has time for that stuff. I'd give him a C+ if I were grading him (Bush gets a D, Clinton gets a B-, Bush I gets a B+, Reagan gets an A for point of reference).
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7246
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Socialized Healthcare

Postby PLAYER57832 on Thu May 13, 2010 6:05 pm

thegreekdog wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
No, but President Obama is doing the same things as President Bush is. Seriously. He really and truly is.

In many cases, I am quite sure you are correct.
In fact, I would say I KNOW you are correct. It is a function of politics today.

What's most frustrating, though, is not so much that Obama is doing the same things, its that so many think the solution is for Republicans to stonewall any real change, and we need to continue on this path of supporting the wealthy while largely ignoring the rest of us. We get thrown a couple of "bones", like a small tax cut (during a recession, when we really should be paying more..), but meanwhile, all we get is talk, talk, talk about wallstreet changes, mortgage relief, etc.


I'm talking strictly about the Patriot Act. I'm not talking about economic policies.

I was referring to the entire "kit and caboodle"


I don't think we can judge President Obama with respect to economics yet (except for a few things I've already identified - namely the cost-benefit of the job creation act and the wanton spending of money that we don't have). I think some parts of his job creation act were really effective. Other parts, not so much. I disagree with the bailouts, but a Republican president would have done the same thing, so I can't really have a beef with President Obama on that one. I'm kind of disappointed about his lack of action on gay rights and the Patriot Act, but he has time for that stuff. I'd give him a C+ if I were grading him (Bush gets a D, Clinton gets a B-, Bush I gets a B+, Reagan gets an A for point of reference).


Reagan an A (??) Actually, its pretty hard for any current president to get above a D-C. I think Bush actually gets an "A" if your measure is expansion of the President's power. However, ... I basically agree with you.
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Socialized Healthcare

Postby Woodruff on Fri May 14, 2010 11:53 am

PLAYER57832 wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:Well then, let's say Presidents Bush and Obama do the same things. Let's say President Bush didn't tell us what he was doing. Let's say President Obama does tell us what he's doing (I don't think he is, but I'm saying this for the sake of argument). I see no concrete difference. They are both doing bad things. So just because President Obama says he's tapping your child's cell phone, does not make him any better of a president in this regard than President Bush.

The part I turned blue is the critical point.

A hypothetical is not the same as reality, and that is the point. Bush DID those things. Obama, so far has not.
On other fronts... Gabon dug up a good article regarding Haliburton.

I am not saying Obama is above criticism, by a long shot! I am just not going to be party to a "bash session". It does no one any good to exaggerate or toss undeserved slurs, particularly not the ones tossing them.

So, if Obama is wiretapping kids.. .let's hear it. Else... its mud slinging and not worthy discussion. let's not try to emulate lionz


Now, I'm pretty sure that Salon isn't exactly a bastion of right-wing politics: http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/05/13/citizens
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Woodruff
 
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: Socialized Healthcare

Postby PopeBenXVI on Fri May 14, 2010 10:42 pm

PLAYER57832 wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
No, but President Obama is doing the same things as President Bush is. Seriously. He really and truly is.

In many cases, I am quite sure you are correct.
In fact, I would say I KNOW you are correct. It is a function of politics today.

What's most frustrating, though, is not so much that Obama is doing the same things, its that so many think the solution is for Republicans to stonewall any real change, and we need to continue on this path of supporting the wealthy while largely ignoring the rest of us. We get thrown a couple of "bones", like a small tax cut (during a recession, when we really should be paying more..), but meanwhile, all we get is talk, talk, talk about wallstreet changes, mortgage relief, etc.


How can you say we should be paying more? The government should be spending less. The more money we give them the more they spend. How does paying more taxes fix the fallen nature of man and corruption in the government regarding their spending? Their is not enough tax money in the world Player. The money belongs to the people not an authoritative Gov Obama Forcing us to pay for others abortions via the "health care" tax. Spending less = having to tax less to meet budgets = more money in people's pockets to choose their own health care options which would not include subsidizing abortions.
Image

semen est sanguis Christianorum
Major PopeBenXVI
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 12:03 am
Location: citta del Vaticano

Re: Socialized Healthcare

Postby BigBallinStalin on Fri May 14, 2010 10:52 pm

thegreekdog wrote:
I don't think we can judge President Obama with respect to economics yet (except for a few things I've already identified - namely the cost-benefit of the job creation act and the wanton spending of money that we don't have). I think some parts of his job creation act were really effective. Other parts, not so much. I disagree with the bailouts, but a Republican president would have done the same thing, so I can't really have a beef with President Obama on that one. I'm kind of disappointed about his lack of action on gay rights and the Patriot Act, but he has time for that stuff. I'd give him a C+ if I were grading him (Bush gets a D, Clinton gets a B-, Bush I gets a B+, Reagan gets an A for point of reference).



TGD, why would you rate Bush with a B+?

His handling of the Panama canal situation was very... blunt, to say the least. That and the Persian Gulf War by not allowing more time for Saudi Arabia to negotiate some kind of arrangement, and basically the poor handling of that war (in the long-term sense of things).

Of course, I'm overlooking domestic issues and some other things, so I'd like for you to enlighten me.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Socialized Healthcare

Postby PopeBenXVI on Sat May 15, 2010 11:27 am

Reagan - A

Bush1 - C- War

Clinton - F Brady bill, ruby ridge/waco murders, Had intel on location to take out Binladden and chose not too take him out, Monica, NAFTA

Bush2 - D- War, Patriot act, Bailout

Obama - F- racist, bailout"s", Patriot act, very bad supreme court nominees, stopped missile shield, Health care Tax/etc, cap and tax push, demeaning the American people to our faces, cutting on our country while in other countries, ripping on Arizona for wanting to enforce it's boarders. surrounded himself with lobbyists after campaigning against lobbyists, Blagojevich's court papers reveal Obama talked with him Dec 1st about the senate seat but Obama lied to everyone and said he "had no contact with him or his office" then 1 week later the Gov was indicted. Terrorist trials in American Civil court, 3 terrorist attacks (one successful) since Obama's election and they still wont say they will profile "muslim" extremists.

Impeach Obama. This is just his first year or so
Image

semen est sanguis Christianorum
Major PopeBenXVI
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 12:03 am
Location: citta del Vaticano

Re: Repealing Socialized Healthcare

Postby PopeBenXVI on Sun May 16, 2010 10:05 am

Oh yeah and then their was the lie when he broke his word about taking public financing for his campaign. Changed his mind once he realized the presidency was for sale when he could raise over 800 million.

Too many things to keep track of that one slipped my mind
Image

semen est sanguis Christianorum
Major PopeBenXVI
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 12:03 am
Location: citta del Vaticano

Re: Repealing Socialized Healthcare

Postby Neoteny on Sun May 16, 2010 12:43 pm

Image
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
User avatar
Major Neoteny
 
Posts: 3396
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 10:24 pm
Location: Atlanta, Georgia

Re: Socialized Healthcare

Postby Phatscotty on Sun May 16, 2010 9:10 pm

BigBallinStalin wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
I don't think we can judge President Obama with respect to economics yet (except for a few things I've already identified - namely the cost-benefit of the job creation act and the wanton spending of money that we don't have). I think some parts of his job creation act were really effective. Other parts, not so much. I disagree with the bailouts, but a Republican president would have done the same thing, so I can't really have a beef with President Obama on that one. I'm kind of disappointed about his lack of action on gay rights and the Patriot Act, but he has time for that stuff. I'd give him a C+ if I were grading him (Bush gets a D, Clinton gets a B-, Bush I gets a B+, Reagan gets an A for point of reference).



TGD, why would you rate Bush with a B+?

His handling of the Panama canal situation was very... blunt, to say the least. That and the Persian Gulf War by not allowing more time for Saudi Arabia to negotiate some kind of arrangement, and basically the poor handling of that war (in the long-term sense of things).

Of course, I'm overlooking domestic issues and some other things, so I'd like for you to enlighten me.


9-11 opinions and responses aside, domestically, Bush worked with the democrats A LOT. Democrats gave/give him zero credit. The government worked as it was supposed to work. More than a few times republicans stood up against Bush.

However, I will not lay the abuse of signing statements at Bushes feet, although I did have a huge problem with his use of them, I would say signing statements are an "executive abuse" rather than a single president's abuse. They continue to be abused at twice the rate...
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Acceptable Content

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users