Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 4:20:42 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2016 11:33:28 GMT
And for the record - oh yes, there was major blowback about Bush and the book. For YEARS around here we had fights about it, everytime Bush and 9/11 was brought up. I find it hard to believe that it has slipped so many minds.
|
|
AmeliaBloomer
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,842
Location: USA
Jun 26, 2014 5:01:45 GMT
|
Post by AmeliaBloomer on Mar 24, 2016 12:17:05 GMT
To think that just 75 years ago the American people didn't even realize their president was an invalid.
The 24-hour upcloseandpersonal news cycle results in too much knowledge. Instead of giving us more clarity, it just breeds pettiness.
|
|
|
Post by compeateropeator on Mar 24, 2016 12:19:37 GMT
And for the record - oh yes, there was major blowback about Bush and the book. For YEARS around here we had fights about it, everytime Bush and 9/11 was brought up. I find it hard to believe that it has slipped so many minds. Again it has not slipped my mind. What I said earlier (and am standing by) is that it was a particular group of people saying it and fighting about it, but it was NOT all of the left leaning Peas saying it. So you may have been fighting about it for years, but you have been fighting with the same people and not ALL of us. Glad to see you stopped in, hope all is well in your world. I was waiting to to see how you viewed this issue, and I am happy to say I was not shocked.
|
|
|
Post by katieanna on Mar 24, 2016 12:38:22 GMT
Here is my take on the situation. I think our President was tacky and tasteless to make his comments about Brussels while at a baseball game. He does an interview on ESPN for goodness sakes...not the best world news source. He spends less than a minute offering his thoughts and prayers and then goes back to the business of doing the wave with a communist dictator while smiling and having the time of his life. This incident wouldn't really be a blip on my radar except that this is his MO. He spends a minute out of his day to comment on the brutal beheading of an American citizen then hits the links with some sports star (can't remember which one), we lose 4 Americans including the Ambassador and he flies out to a fund raiser in Vegas the morning of the incident, his lack of response to the Paris terrorist attack just shows me how either out of touch he is or how little he cares about what is happening in the world. It is as much about so called optics as it is about the symbolism. I dunno, I think he lacked any kind of awareness at all about the state world right now and I guess I just don't get the pass he gets from many that support him (including the media). Yes, papercrafteradvocate, you are correct. I think this trip wasn't in the best interest of the US and so that does color my judgement which is why I mentioned it. I will counter that by saying there are many that can't seem to admit that President Obama might have made an error in judgement by staying at the baseball game. You realize that ESPN is a sports media outlet, and they were at a ballgame, the reporter was there, most likely to just chat about sports for a minute and NOT be an interview about a bombing per se? I'm sure that reporter tossed all his original questions out the window once news of the bombing in Brussels happened. The alternative? President Obama leaves the event, then gets heavily criticized for doing so, his naysayers commenting on the cost of the trip, taxpayer expense, he really didn't care about Cuba, blah, blah, blah. Or that they allow a hoard of other reporters in to talk about the bombing and disrupts the game. He'd be crucified for that too! He is just not gonna win with those who don't like him, plain and simple! This is my take on it - and, yes, my opinion only. I agree with Kimberlee. As far as I'm concerned, the President has no business kow-towing to Cuba - NONE! The whole Cuban-communist regime goes against everything we've traditionally believe in as a nation. But, personally, I think Cuba is right up Obama's alley. I also believe that if becoming President wouldn't have given Obama the opportunities to undermine this nation, he never would have been a presidential contender. As far as I'm concerned, he's the most UN-American President our nation has ever had. Now you know why I rarely respond on these political threads.
|
|
|
Post by iamkristinl16 on Mar 24, 2016 12:47:07 GMT
Is this a talking point on Fox News today?
Anyway, i see the baseball game as president Obama working on foreign relations. At that time, was there anything more specific he should have been doing in or for Belgium personally? Not in my opinion. It was best to go on with what was planned and focus on what he Could do at the time. We also don't know what was going on behind the scenes.
|
|
grinningcat
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,663
Jun 26, 2014 13:06:35 GMT
|
Post by grinningcat on Mar 24, 2016 12:56:00 GMT
You realize that ESPN is a sports media outlet, and they were at a ballgame, the reporter was there, most likely to just chat about sports for a minute and NOT be an interview about a bombing per se? I'm sure that reporter tossed all his original questions out the window once news of the bombing in Brussels happened. The alternative? President Obama leaves the event, then gets heavily criticized for doing so, his naysayers commenting on the cost of the trip, taxpayer expense, he really didn't care about Cuba, blah, blah, blah. Or that they allow a hoard of other reporters in to talk about the bombing and disrupts the game. He'd be crucified for that too! He is just not gonna win with those who don't like him, plain and simple! This is my take on it - and, yes, my opinion only. I agree with Kimberlee. As far as I'm concerned, the President has no business kow-towing to Cuba - NONE! The whole Cuban-communist regime goes against everything we've traditionally believe in as a nation. But, personally, I think Cuba is right up Obama's alley. I also believe that if becoming President wouldn't have given Obama the opportunities to undermine this nation, he never would have been a presidential contender. As far as I'm concerned, he's the most UN-American President our nation has ever had. Now you know why I rarely respond on these political threads. Histrionic much? I can't roll my eyes back in my head far enough at your comment about "kow-towing". As for the OP, why the hell would the President of the United States have to do anything other than comment about an attack in a country that he has no control over? He's not the President of Belgium... they have their own. If he had to stop doing whatever he was doing every time something in the world happened, nothing would get done. It's idiotic to compare this to 9/11... but I get that it suits your agenda.
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Mar 24, 2016 12:57:43 GMT
Is this a talking point on Fox News today? Probably. You're smart enough to realize that peas have long spread sheets and remember all kinds of stuff all on their own without having to resort to parroting one specific media outlet. Over the years, I have taken my time, typed out a response here, then turned on the tv or radio a while later to see that they're now saying the same thing. 2+2=4. Different people come up with the same way to balance an equation.
|
|
|
Post by katieanna on Mar 24, 2016 14:36:12 GMT
Histrionic much? I can't roll my eyes back in my head far enough at your comment about "kow-towing". Yes, I bet you can't.
|
|
|
Post by compeateropeator on Mar 24, 2016 14:46:15 GMT
I am not sure if this thread is the place to ask this but I am. This is a legitimate question because I don't really understand and would like to. I feel like I should be able to understand it but I don't . Why do people think that President Obama's sole purpose is to undermine our nation? What is it that he is gaining? I guess I could understand if it was possible for him to become a dictator or remain as our President for life. But with the theories that his whole agenda is to undermine our nation and take away our liberties, what does he gain? Why do you think he is purposely doing this? l understand differences in ideologies, differences in polices, and differences in what you feel are important issues. I see that every day with people on all sides. Some are way left of me and some are way right. While I think that moving our nation in those directions could be very bad and detrimental to our society, a society that should allow us to coexist peacefully, I don't consider it undermining. I take undermining to purposely trying to weaken or damage. Maybe I just don't understand what undermine means? I feel that Ted Cruz isn't really running for President because he has the interest of all of us at heart. I believe he is running to be able to change the laws so that people are forced to live his way. But I don't think he is trying to undermine the nation, I just think he thinks his way is the right way. I am sure that I am making this long and confusing, I can't seem to articulate what I am trying to say. This post definitely requires the if you made it this far thanks for reading.
|
|
|
Post by anxiousmom on Mar 24, 2016 15:07:50 GMT
I skipped from page 1 to 4 so pardon me if this has been said... Regardless of what happened in Brussels - I have a real problem with my president sitting and laughing and doing the wave with a known terrorist, responsible for the slaughter of untold numbers of his own citizens, just a day after posing for a picture with that mans co-terrorist buddy looming over his head. They killed blacks and gays and artists and dissidents. Women and children. Castro still holds thousands in prisons. And Obama yucks it up like a schoolboy with him. Cubans fled and died by the thousands to reach our shores, ripping families apart, and Obama just gave them a big fat middle finger. This trip was nothing but a boot licking political stunt. Obama feels more affinity with Castro than with the American people. I am ashamed of and disgusted by him. I've been doing some reading over the last couple of days because I was curious about how the Cuban-American population felt about President Obama's visit to Cuba. Over all, from what I can tell, the majority are cautiously optimistic about the visit and the idea of renewing ties with Cuba. There are some that feel differently, but majority felt like it was a step forward. I am in now way diminishing the horror of what Fidel Castro did (my mom still tells stories of growing up in Central Florida and the very real fear of Cuba and what could happen- the duck and cover years.) But I do think that if those who have ties to Cuba and with first hand experience are optimistic about what is happening with a strengthening of relations between our two countries then perhaps we could give them some credit as well. Maybe it is because we have stood on dock watching the Coast Guard shepherd over a group of people who fled Cuba on what amounted to inner-tubes lashed together crying in joy that I can think that if they are willing to extend the hand, why can't the rest of us?
|
|
|
Post by BeckyTech on Mar 24, 2016 15:16:57 GMT
|
|
|
Post by BeckyTech on Mar 24, 2016 16:29:35 GMT
Excuse my skepticism on the numbers and impact. This is an administration that changes statistics to reflect whatever they want them to say. You know how they claim that deportations are way up? Of course they are. A deportation counts as someone stepping foot in this country, being bussed 200 miles and then let out at the other end.
The U.S. is doing about 20 bombing missions a day. According to what I'm reading, that's a drop in the bucket of what they should be doing.
Destroying their oil revenue? They took out a couple of oil tanker trucks. Big deal. “We didn’t go after oil wells — actually hitting oil wells that ISIS controls because we didn’t want to do environmental damage, and we didn’t want to destroy that infrastructure,” said former spy chief Michael Morell. Maybe they need to reconsider.
ISIS may have lost some territory, but they also gained some:
“When they come under pressure, they don’t fight to the end. They withdraw and counterattack somewhere else,” said Columb Strack, an analyst for IHS.
An example of that strategy was seen in May, when the group was losing control of areas near the border of Syria and Turkey. Instead of staying to defend the region, Islamic State fighters redoubled offensives on other front lines. The group was able to take over Palmyra, in central Syria, a city of historical and strategic importance, and Ramadi, the capital of Anbar Province, a Sunni-dominated area in Iraq. Both cities were previously under the control of each country’s government.
Bombing the bank is a great step, and may have resulted in a temporary cut in fighters' salaries, but they have a multitude of revenue sources, including kidnapping for ransom. "Although the U.S. and the U.K. have thus far publicly refused to pay kidnap ransoms, France may have paid up to $18 million for four of its captured journalists in April 2014, and locals are said to be ransomed for anywhere between $500 and $200,000 each, reported the Congressional Research Service." They also tax the locals, etc., etc. We can't go after every revenue source, but the lack of commitment shown to date really makes me wonder what else we could be going after.
It's a multi-headed monster that needs coordinated (real) leadership to make any significant inroads against. Because of the continual attacks, of which Belgium was the latest, clearly what we are doing isn't all that effective. Everyone keeps asking what he should do? How about giving more than just lip service and really re-evaluating the strategy that clearly isn't working very well.
I might also remind you that Obama says are southern border is secure. Well, according to the instructions given to the border patrol, they are not supposed to even patrol in high traffic areas. People of all nationalities are getting through easily. The terrorists know that. Sheriff Babeu: Obama has ‘handcuffed’ Border Patrol
|
|
|
Post by mellyw on Mar 24, 2016 16:31:47 GMT
I certainly remember "some" people & the vitriol over Bush finishing reading that book. Even saw some of it in the foreign press( I was living in England the time). It was unfair & ugly. Just the thought to this day, of how a bad reaction could have effected those kids, ugh. He handled it well, in my opinion.
I'm also a little surprised that people don't remember the jokes & snide remarks.
In this where I put the disclaimer that I'm an Obama supporter? Well, there it is.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 4:20:42 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2016 16:38:40 GMT
So what? Did you know during WWII the King and Queen of The UK stayed in London during bombings. They went out and about in the city visiting the areas damaged by the bombings and visited those injured by the bombings. Among other things this was the Royal Family's way of telling Hitler "screw you". Fast forward. We have a President who has said if you let terrorist dictate how you live your life they will win. After being briefed about the attacks The President called the Prime Minister of Belgium and as all American Presidents do in situations like this I'm sure he offered US resources if needed by the Beligum officials to help in the investigations. At a regularly scheduled press conference he condemned the attacks. And then he continued the rest of the day's scheduled events. What the President did was give the terrorists the US version of "screw you". The way I see it if the President had rushed back to the White House, to do no more then he had already done, the terrorist would have won a battle in this war. Now if the attacks had been on US soil I have no doubt the President would have cut short his visit to Cuba and come home. I'm just surprised no one has come to this thread and jump up and down in manufactured outrage because there are pictures of The President and First Lady doing the tango. If I was on the right instead manufacturing this "outrage" over what the President did I would be more concerned about what is happening in the Republican party. You got Cruz one step away from advocating the same mistake this country did years ago with the Japanese internment camps and Trump talking about using nukes. Both of these comments make good recruiting propaganda for terrorists. Can't say that about a US President doing the wave at a ball game. As for most Americans nothing is scarier then the idea Trump could end up with the launch codes of all our nukes. I'm taking a wild guess here but I'm sure our allies feel the same way.
|
|
|
Post by BeckyTech on Mar 24, 2016 16:59:04 GMT
You got Cruz one step away from advocating the same mistake this country did years ago with the Japanese internment camps and Trump talking about using nukes. Both of these comments make good recruiting propaganda for terrorists. Oh please. One step away? I don't know where you get that from. I don't agree with what he actually said, but he didn't even come close to implying that. Pffft. And according to the polls, Trump will never be president. Such exaggeration and drama. Condemning the attacks is nice talk. That's all it is.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 4:20:42 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2016 17:38:20 GMT
You got Cruz one step away from advocating the same mistake this country did years ago with the Japanese internment camps and Trump talking about using nukes. Both of these comments make good recruiting propaganda for terrorists. Oh please. One step away? I don't know where you get that from. I don't agree with what he actually said, but he didn't even come close to implying that. Pffft. And according to the polls, Trump will never be president. Such exaggeration and drama. Condemning the attacks is nice talk. That's all it is. Is it? Cruz is using fear to single out a specific group of people. That is what was done to the Japanese right after Pearl Harbor. Look what happen to the Japanese once that was done. Fear is a strong emotion that if used successfully can sway the masses to support a notion. Bush/Cheney used fear after 9/11 very successfully to push their agenda in Iraq/Middle East. And that worked out so well. You know as far as Trump not becoming President, since July people had felt he would stick his foot in his mouth and he would be gone. Here it is March almost April and Trump is just as strong if not stronger than he was in last summer/fall. So it's entirely possible Trump could be President. Its unfortunate the Republicans have let it get to the point that the Republican nominee for President will more than likely be Trump or Cruz.
|
|
|
Post by BeckyTech on Mar 24, 2016 18:00:05 GMT
Its unfortunate the Republicans have let it get to the point that the Republican nominee for President will more than likely be Trump or Cruz. The Democrat party is hemorrhaging voters who are leaving the party to register as Republican and Independent who are voting in the Republican primaries in droves. Oh, and don't forget the press who hangs on Trump's every word. There is plenty of blame to go around. Fear is indeed a strong emotion. There are plenty of people like you doing their share of fearmongering, exaggerating, and dramatizing. But don't forget, Kasich is still in the race and the convention is yet to be. If it is a multi-voting process, I'm hoping Kasich will prevail. Meh, we'll see.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 4:20:42 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2016 18:24:06 GMT
Its unfortunate the Republicans have let it get to the point that the Republican nominee for President will more than likely be Trump or Cruz. The Democrat party is hemorrhaging voters who are leaving the party to register as Republican and Independent who are voting in the Republican primaries in droves. Oh, and don't forget the press who hangs on Trump's every word. There is plenty of blame to go around. Fear is indeed a strong emotion. There are plenty of people like you doing their share of fearmongering, exaggerating, and dramatizing. But don't forget, Kasich is still in the race and the convention is yet to be. If it is a multi-voting process, I'm hoping Kasich will prevail. Meh, we'll see. But but but but...... But all you would like, it really doesn't change the state of affairs of the Republican Party. The Republican Party did this to themselves without any help from either the media or Democrats.
|
|
|
Post by BeckyTech on Mar 24, 2016 18:50:59 GMT
krazyscrapper, the Democrat nominees appear to be why they are losing voters in droves. One is a proven liar, the other a socialist. The FBI doesn't do standard security checks as Hillary would like her voters to believe. And call it any flavor you want, most Americans clearly don't want socialism.
You are right, the Republican party may be in disarray, but the Democrat choices appear to be worse judging by the way the voters are leaving the party. They could have experienced a huge surge with the right candidate. The Democrats did this to themselves.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 4:20:42 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2016 19:19:14 GMT
krazyscrapper , the Democrat nominees appear to be why they are losing voters in droves. One is a proven liar, the other a socialist. The FBI doesn't do standard security checks as Hillary would like her voters to believe. And call it any flavor you want, most Americans clearly don't want socialism.
You are right, the Republican party may be in disarray, but the Democrat choices appear to be worse judging by the way the voters are leaving the party. They could have experienced a huge surge with the right candidate. The Democrats did this to themselves. Losing voters in droves? I went looking for an actual number of Democrats leaving the party that would be considered "in droves". Didn't find much. Maybe you could provide the numbers? Now I did read that both parties were losing people as these folks would rather be "independent" instead of being with one party or the other. The Republicans were losing more people than the Democrats but this was before the current elections so who knows if that still holds up. But if you should like to back up your "droves" with actual numbers from a disinterested third party..........
|
|
valleyview
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,816
Jun 27, 2014 18:41:26 GMT
|
Post by valleyview on Mar 24, 2016 19:43:48 GMT
Here's an opinion piece by Joe Scarborough pretty much agreeing with the idea that Cruz's Muslim policy is a real step backward for our country. wapo.st/1RhD6Qe
|
|
elainebenis
Junior Member
Posts: 50
Jul 3, 2014 23:26:11 GMT
|
Post by elainebenis on Mar 24, 2016 19:53:42 GMT
Countering epistemic closure is fool's errand, but I've got 2 minutes to spare: They took out a couple of oil tanker trucks. Big deal. US forces took out 116 tankers in one day. Is Breitbart lying to you as well? The current state of conservatism lies directly at the feet of conservatives - leadership, media, lobbyists and voters alike. Until these same conservatives take a long, honest, reality-based look at how they got to this point and take ownership the GOP will continue to spiral into further dysfunction. Stephen King nails it, I think: "Conservatives who for 8 years sowed the dragon's teeth of partisan politics are horrified to discover they have grown an actual dragon."
|
|
|
Post by BeckyTech on Mar 25, 2016 4:43:58 GMT
But if you should like to back up your "droves" with actual numbers from a disinterested third party.......... Certainly. The numbers I've seen are from local papers that seem non-partisan, if that's your concern. Just reporting numbers. An article in the Boston Herald and one in Tulsa World. Boston Herald: Nearly 20,000 Bay State Democrats have fled the party this winter, with thousands doing so to join the Republican ranks, according to the state's top elections official. Secretary of State William Galvin said more than 16,300 Democrats have shed their party affiliation and become independent voters since Jan. 1, while nearly 3,500 more shifted to the MassGOP ahead of tomorrow’s “Super Tuesday” presidential primary. Tulsa World: Despite the recent uptick, Democratic registration is down 45,000 from a year ago, while Republican registration has increased some 13,000. Independents are up about 10,000.
|
|
|
Post by BeckyTech on Mar 25, 2016 4:54:48 GMT
Um ... yay? Your quotes and comments about conservatism don't really matter to me. I'm not even a registered Republican, I'm a registered Independent. I just really like the fiscal conservative approach Republicans have: smaller government, less spending. It appeals to me greatly. We all live within budgets, I think the federal government should have to also. My perception is that the Democrats kick the can down the road in favor of more spending now. With the country trillions of dollars in debt, it's catching up quickly. There is a finite amount of money.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 4:20:42 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 25, 2016 5:25:51 GMT
But if you should like to back up your "droves" with actual numbers from a disinterested third party.......... Certainly. The numbers I've seen are from local papers that seem non-partisan, if that's your concern. Just reporting numbers. An article in the Boston Herald and one in Tulsa World. Boston Herald: Nearly 20,000 Bay State Democrats have fled the party this winter, with thousands doing so to join the Republican ranks, according to the state's top elections official. Secretary of State William Galvin said more than 16,300 Democrats have shed their party affiliation and become independent voters since Jan. 1, while nearly 3,500 more shifted to the MassGOP ahead of tomorrow’s “Super Tuesday” presidential primary. Tulsa World: Despite the recent uptick, Democratic registration is down 45,000 from a year ago, while Republican registration has increased some 13,000. Independents are up about 10,000. link
You may want to read this article about what the GOP voters are doing. Has some in the Republican Party concerned. By the way both parties have been losing folks for years. The biggest voting block are independents. And I always get suspicious when someone shifts from one party to the other just before a primary election. More often or not these folks do it to mess up the other side's primary. Several peas admitted doing it on this board.
|
|
|
Post by BeckyTech on Mar 25, 2016 5:30:23 GMT
krazyscrapper, yeah, that's pretty much what I've been reading as well.
|
|
|
Post by Marina Kingston on Mar 25, 2016 8:00:17 GMT
link
You may want to read this article about what the GOP voters are doing. Has some in the Republican Party concerned. By the way both parties have been losing folks for years. The biggest voting block are independents. And I always get suspicious when someone shifts from one party to the other just before a primary election. More often or not these folks do it to mess up the other side's primary. Several peas admitted doing it on this board. There are still people who fully believe the media? surprised)
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 4:20:42 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 25, 2016 14:26:03 GMT
link
You may want to read this article about what the GOP voters are doing. Has some in the Republican Party concerned. By the way both parties have been losing folks for years. The biggest voting block are independents. And I always get suspicious when someone shifts from one party to the other just before a primary election. More often or not these folks do it to mess up the other side's primary. Several peas admitted doing it on this board. There are still people who fully believe the media? surprised) Prove that the media is wrong if you can't or won't then you are doing nothing more than making empty comments.
|
|
|
Post by pierogi on Mar 25, 2016 15:22:10 GMT
Countering epistemic closure is fool's errand, but I've got 2 minutes to spare: They took out a couple of oil tanker trucks. Big deal. US forces took out 116 tankers in one day. Is Breitbart lying to you as well? The current state of conservatism lies directly at the feet of conservatives - leadership, media, lobbyists and voters alike. Until these same conservatives take a long, honest, reality-based look at how they got to this point and take ownership the GOP will continue to spiral into further dysfunction. Stephen King nails it, I think: "Conservatives who for 8 years sowed the dragon's teeth of partisan politics are horrified to discover they have grown an actual dragon." I always want to like your posts more than once. When Bartlett wrote about epistemic closure back in 2010, even he couldn't imagine how crazy the echo chamber would get. We haven't hit bottom, either.
|
|
|
Post by BeckyTech on Mar 25, 2016 17:12:35 GMT
The topic of this thread is that he doesn't seem to take the terrorist threat on a very serious level. And that's coming from both sides, not just the right.
A couple of days ago, Obama said:
"But we defeat them in part by saying you are not strong, you are weak. We send a message to those who might be inspired by them to say you are not going to change our values of liberty and openness and the respect of all people." I can't help but juxtapose those words against this image:
Even in part, I don't think those words will mean much to these people, nor have any affect.
|
|