Forums » Group W Forums » Topical Tropical Discussions

 


Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Feb 04, 2009 12:38 pm
  

User avatar
Arlo Fanatic

Joined: Sep 12, 2000
Posts: 6517
Location: New Jersey
Eileen wrote:
I see our President more as the "Barney Miller" type.


I saw the last one more as the "Forest Gump" type.

It's Dave's turn to suffer for the next 4 to 8 years! But he won't suffer as much as we did the last 8! :D
Maybe also by then the Cowboys might win a playoff game and he will unbunch his panties too! :shock: :D


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Feb 04, 2009 12:53 pm
  

User avatar
The W!zard

Joined: Aug 25, 1999
Posts: 1058
Images: 108
Location: Leonardtown, MD
First - just wanted to say that the posts regarding DDR's dad have been moved from this topic to Moose Friends where they belong.

MG wrote:
Dave, I am sorry... it looks like we are all getting down on you.. I mean nothing personal. I'm with Kevin, please don't zap my account!
I am also with cheryl, psb (who is with cheryl),Larry, Ceashel, Zap, DRR, and a bunch of others.


Ok, I'm not going to zap anyone's account just because we have differing opinions.

MG wrote:
It sounds trivial, but perhaps "Hypocrisy " is too strong a word?
What is the issue here? He had the temperature up , but wants Americans to lower theirs? Just want to make sure, are you are looking for someone to refute over the statements on the temperature setting ?


I don't think that it's too strong a word... from Wikipedia:

Quote:
Hypocrisy (or the state of being a hypocrite) is the act of preaching a certain belief, religion or way of life, but not, in fact, holding these same virtues oneself.


It says nothing about the belief or way of life having to be a major thing, it basically boils down to saying one thing and doing another - the original example used may be a trivial one but it still falls under that definition. And continuing on, the whole thing with Wolin and appointing lobbyists to me doesn't seem as trivial but definantly fits the description as well.

And just a reminder, I can probably VERY easily go back through some of the threads about W where people have pointed out or joked about things just as trivial. Yet when I do the same - it all of a sudden appears to me to be a double standard going here. And again, just because I have a differing viewpoint does not mean I take any of your comments personally. But I do have a constitutional right to express my differing views just as we all do.

Quote:
Here are former lobbyists Obama has tapped for top jobs:

* Eric Holder, attorney general nominee, was registered to lobby until 2004 on behalf of clients including Global Crossing, a bankrupt telecommunications firm [now confirmed].
* Tom Vilsack, secretary of agriculture nominee, was registered to lobby as recently as last year on behalf of the National Education Association.
* William Lynn, deputy defense secretary nominee, was registered to lobby as recently as last year for defense contractor Raytheon, where he was a top executive.
* William Corr, deputy health and human services secretary nominee, was registered to lobby until last year for the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, a non-profit that pushes to limit tobacco use.
* David Hayes, deputy interior secretary nominee, was registered to lobby until 2006 for clients, including the regional utility San Diego Gas & Electric.
* Mark Patterson, chief of staff to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, was registered to lobby as recently as last year for financial giant Goldman Sachs.
* Ron Klain, chief of staff to Vice President Joe Biden, was registered to lobby until 2005 for clients, including the Coalition for Asbestos Resolution, U.S. Airways, Airborne Express and drug-maker ImClone.
* Mona Sutphen, deputy White House chief of staff, was registered to lobby for clients, including Angliss International in 2003.
* Melody Barnes, domestic policy council director, lobbied in 2003 and 2004 for liberal advocacy groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, the American Constitution Society and the Center for Reproductive Rights.
* Cecilia Munoz, White House director of intergovernmental affairs, was a lobbyist as recently as last year for the National Council of La Raza, a Hispanic advocacy group.
* Patrick Gaspard, White House political affairs director, was a lobbyist for the Service Employees International Union.
* Michael Strautmanis, chief of staff to the president’s assistant for intergovernmental relations, lobbied for the American Association of Justice from 2001 until 2005.

This doesn’t count Tom Daschle, who never registered as a lobbyist but got paid millions for his political connections in pursuit of preferential treatment for his clients in the health-care industry.

It’s been less than two weeks since Obama took office, and he’s appointed a lobbyist a day to a government position. What kind of governing philosophy is that, if not a big “For Sale” sign on the White House, at least according to Obama’s own anti-lobbyist rhetoric on the campaign trail? A lobbyist a day helps keeps accountability away.


MG wrote:
Yes, he is politician, too. But he has at least half the world behind him and his message is hope. He is saying, hey we ( together) can make an impact on this world.


I will give you all that if nothing else, the man is a VERY charismatic speaker and preaches a lot about hope and change - unfortunantly, these days it's hard to believe anything coming out of a politician's mouth (especially a very smooth talking one). To me, actions speak way louder than words, and so far, he hasn't done a good job at all of swaying my opinion. Hell, he told us he was gonna screw up, and just two weeks later we have our first confirmation. Kinda makes me wonder what else is yet to come...

You asked if I thought that "Hypocrisy " is too strong a word? And I answered that I did not and gave some reference to support my belief. Now, in turn, I ask you - Don't you think that making such a sweeping claim like "...at least half the world is behind him..." is perhaps a bit too strong as well? Or do you have supporting evidence to such a bold statement?

MG wrote:
I respect you views, but I have come to admire the One, as you put it, and hey I need and want hope right now.


Everyone is entitled to their own views, and I am glad that you have found hope in The One. Unfortunantly, from what I have seen so far, I don't expect to be seeing anything from O that would give me hope. For that I choose to look to a higher power.


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:30 pm
  

User avatar
The W!zard

Joined: Aug 25, 1999
Posts: 1058
Images: 108
Location: Leonardtown, MD
DRR wrote:
Now is the time for all good men, and women, to shed their old, stained w underoos and put on their big boy pants, and come to the aid of their country.


Charles E. Weller would be so proud... :)

Larry wrote:
It's Dave's turn to suffer for the next 4 to 8 years!


Actually, I'm looking forward to things being rectified or at least put in check in 2 years.


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Feb 04, 2009 3:40 pm
  

User avatar
The W!zard

Joined: Aug 25, 1999
Posts: 1058
Images: 108
Location: Leonardtown, MD
Hey, they even worked "Blunder" into this one:

Melissa Clouthier wrote:
Obama's "Blunders" Give Me No Joy

Unlike those on the Left, who undermined the legitimacy of President George W. Bush and took every opportunity to humiliate and hamstring him, it gives me no satisfaction to see President Barack Obama struggle at every turn since his inauguration. It's not good for America to have the President putting forward tax cheats and criminals, being bullied by Russia, pushed by Korea, taunted by Iran, and dominance downed by the EU (although, I'm glad their tariff fright changed that obscene Stimulus Bill provision). He looks silly.

The world situation is delicate. History lesson (again): Economic instability tends to presage military instability.

America does not need to look like a dithering, unfocused mess right now. Too much is at stake. President Barack Obama needs to pull it together. Now. Of course, that means actually deciding what he believes. He managed to be on every side of every issue. I was kinda hoping he was being deceitful and actually had a perspective about how things should be. Now, I'm not so sure.

Won't it be interesting (and horrible) if we have a likable president personality-wise, who actually causes destruction after having a hated president, who maintained America's reputation far more than anyone wanted to admit?


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Feb 04, 2009 4:16 pm
  

User avatar
Arlo Fanatic

Joined: Sep 12, 2000
Posts: 6517
Location: New Jersey
That's about as much partisan bullshit as I've ever heard. :shock: :lol:

Now, having said that, I see no harm in holding Obama accountable. In fact I would expect it and welcome it. Of course his detractors will focus on the petty when there is nothing else, and that is to be expected.
George W. Bush was left with stuff in pretty good shape, and with any luck and without 9/11, he should have been basically a caretaker president. Of course we know that was not the case. He worked hard to change things for the worse. His decisions were largely based on ideaolgy and the inability to admit mistakes. Refreshingly, Obama has already admitted the "He screwed up" with regard to vetting certain appointment choices.
Obama comes in to the job with so many things messed up due to a combination of failed Bush policy, circumstances and systemic failures of our economic system.I think he is both smart enough and pragmatic enough to get the ball rolling in the right direction. Of course there will be mistakes along the way.


          Top  
Reply with quote  
Offline
PostPosted: Wed Feb 04, 2009 5:47 pm
  

User avatar
Senior ArloNetizen

Joined: Feb 19, 2008
Posts: 560
Please pardon parable paradox:

Pondered, paused, pronounced profuond piteous pettiness.

Parting playfully, peaceful.


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Feb 04, 2009 6:48 pm
  

User avatar
Arlo Fanatic

Joined: Nov 11, 2004
Posts: 2010
Location: Left-of-center
There is some display of bi-partisanship, even though it's not in Congress. Three Republican governors - Our Governor, Jodi Rell of Connecticut, Arnold Schwarzenegger of California, and Charlie Crist of Florida have pledged support for President Obama's economic stimulus package. I must say that Governor Rell has been doing a pretty good job. As a Republican Lt. Governor, she took over when our corrupt, grafty Gov. John Rowland got the boot and did hard time for his crimes and she's been a darned good "guv" so far. She's not afraid to cross party lines if she thinks it's the right thing to do.


          Top  
Reply with quote  
Offline
PostPosted: Wed Feb 04, 2009 11:52 pm
  

Senior ArloNetizen

Joined: Jul 04, 2007
Posts: 634
Dave wrote:
Now, in turn, I ask you - Don't you think that making such a sweeping claim like "...at least half the world is behind him..." is perhaps a bit too strong as well? Or do you have supporting evidence to such a bold statement?



No. I have no hard numbers, votes, polls or scientific data to support that statement, and I withdraw it from this refutation!

I hope you feel better, Dave! :D

My point was that he is a widely supported politician, and many people, including myself and some others here, want to see him succeed for all our sakes.


Last edited by MG on Thu Feb 05, 2009 12:35 am, edited 1 time in total.

          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 12:12 am
  

Senior ArloNetizen

Joined: Jul 30, 2008
Posts: 374
Location: Washington, DC
Larry -- I think that's bit unfair to Mr. Gump. I see our former "leader" more as the guy playing the Beav to Cheney's Eddie Haskell.


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 2:43 am
  

User avatar
The W!zard

Joined: Aug 25, 1999
Posts: 1058
Images: 108
Location: Leonardtown, MD
MG wrote:
My point was that he is a widely supported politician, and many people, including myself and some others here, want to see him succeed for all our sakes.


Now I never said that I didn't want to see him succeed... I'd be stupid for wanting to see our country destroyed and dismantled.

My point is that from my perspective... In the 2 weeks he has been in office he has come across as either someone who is just plain incompetent and doesn't have a clue, or is simply a puppet being pulled by those with money, power, and influence.

I recall Biden saying that Obama would be tested early on - and to me, it seems very frightening that he is pretty much setting the stage to show us all that when it does happen in a big way, we are all in trouble! Place your head between your knees and assume the position...

I will continue to pray for Obama that he makes the right decisions... But there is a concept known as "free will".

However, I will admit - I do find it absolutely hilarious how I've watched 8 years of Bush bashing on here, and now that you all have your guy in office the entire attitude has changed. But when I give back just a small portion of what was dished out over the last 8 years I see nothing but a lot of the bashers just avoiding the topic completely, coming up with excuses, trying to change the subject, making a joke about it, continuing to bash Bush (also avoiding the subject), or just entirely dismissing whatever the topic may be as a non-issue. Avoidance, diversion, and dismissal... Don't get me wrong... I fully expected this kind of behavior, lol!

I do love irony.

MG wrote:
No. I have no hard numbers, votes, polls or scientific data to support that statement, and I withdraw it from this refutation!

I hope you feel better, Dave! :D


Thank you! However, it seems like many are not reading me correctly... My panties aren't bunched up in the least... I'm having a hell of a time here. I am very amused.


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 7:01 am
  

User avatar
Arlo Fanatic

Joined: Oct 18, 2004
Posts: 2251
Dave wrote:
Thank you! However, it seems like many are not reading me correctly... My panties aren't bunched up in the least... I'm having a hell of a time here. I am very amused.


Ya, I have been very amused watching the economy go down the dumper and seeing the conservatives play god on our side politics...really funny stuff! let's shoot more people and get rid of more jobs....how about a tax break for the rich and subsidized capitalism! it is all very amusing?


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 7:29 am
  

User avatar
The W!zard

Joined: Aug 25, 1999
Posts: 1058
Images: 108
Location: Leonardtown, MD
PSBeaty wrote:
how about a tax break for the rich and subsidized capitalism! it is all very amusing?


How about we bring in people who don't even pay taxes? How about we try passing a bill that would likely start another trade war and further tank the economy? How about we start looking like we know what the hell we are doing? No, you are correct - that shit ain't amusing...

Quote:
Barack Obama found another way to look weak and inexperienced this week, this time on the trade war threatened by the administration’s stimulus package. After pandering to unions by inserting a “Buy American” clause in the gigantic porkfest, Europe and Asia threatened trade sanctions on American companies competing for business in their markets. Obama finally ran up the white flag instead of Old Glory.

Give Obama some credit for coming to his senses, albeit a little late. The protectionist language in the bill locks out foreign suppliers from our infrastructure projects, which sounds great until one realizes that other nations will lock out American companies from their infrastructure projects as well. It’s a replay of the Smoot-Hawley disaster, and it would magnify the current economic crisis immeasurably in touching off a trade war — just as the original Smoot-Hawley did in 1930.

Unfortunately, though, Obama looks less like a leader and more like a man reacting to events. He should have foreseen the consequences of the legislation before pushing it. Now, instead of looking like the leader of the free world, Obama looks like a man flailing in the water, looking for lifelines, without a clue as to how to govern or an understanding of trade or foreign relations. He projects weakness, uncertainty, and inexperience at a time when America can ill afford any of those three, let alone the hat trick.


So, let's see... Um, sorry, I fucked up. Oh damn, I fucked up again. But don't worry, I'll turn it around. Shit, fucked up again. Where the hell is Biden? What about his advisors? Surely SOMEONE in office has half a brain cell left. How many more times is he gonna have to appologize before even the left starts turning on him. The honeymoon is over folks.


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 8:06 am
  

User avatar
Arlo Fanatic

Joined: Oct 18, 2004
Posts: 2251
Dave wrote:
How about we bring in people who don't even pay taxes? How about we try passing a bill that would likely start another trade war and further tank the economy? How about we start looking like we know what the hell we are doing? No, you are correct - that shit ain't amusing...

So, let's see... Um, sorry, I fucked up. Oh damn, I fucked up again. But don't worry, I'll turn it around. Shit, fucked up again. Where the hell is Biden? What about his advisors? Surely SOMEONE in office has half a brain cell left. How many more times is he gonna have to appologize before even the left starts turning on him. The honeymoon is over folks.


This is all after conservatives and right wing agenda elected the colossal idiot of all times Dave! Eight years of colossal stupidity that destroyed the economy and fucked up the world! At least this guy says, hey, this guy is not who I thought he was! I don't want to force him into a position I have to count on! I would just as soon get rid of him and find somebody else! To me, that is a refreshing approach!

It takes strength to change directions! Something the previous White House tenant did not comprehend!


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 8:33 am
  

User avatar
The W!zard

Joined: Aug 25, 1999
Posts: 1058
Images: 108
Location: Leonardtown, MD
PSBeaty wrote:
Eight years of colossal stupidity that destroyed the economy and fucked up the world! At least this guy says, hey, this guy is not who I thought he was! I don't want to force him into a position I have to count on! I would just as soon get rid of him and find somebody else! To me, that is a refreshing approach!

It takes strength to change directions! Something the previous White House tenant did not comprehend!


It does take strength to change directions. However, I have yet to see evidence of that... Try to push something through... revolt... back off... repeat. Do that enough times and it goes from strength to stupidity. Who was it that said the definition of insanity was doing the same things again and again and expecting a different outcome???

Blame the previous administration seems to always be the answer.

Quote:
In this globalized world we must remember that it’s not just the US that’s going down, it’s the whole world. Have you seen any good news from any country in the last six months or so? Strain yourself and you might dredge some iota of optimism from somewhere, but in general it’s wishful thinking.

President Obama wants a “fresh” approach to the financial crisis, but buying toxic debt and stimulus packages sound like the old school approach to me. Have any bailouts or stimulus packages ever worked before? I think the Obama administration is just as insane as the previous one (if you believe the classic definition of the word). We actually do need a fresh approach to this crisis for everybody’s sake.

I believe that if a company needs bailing out it is already beyond saving and will not contribute to the stabilizing of the economy in the future. Only successful banks and companies can possibly nurse the US back to health. I have to say that the bailout of GM was an extremely temporary measure and you can guarantee that management will be back for more soon. Have the bailouts created any jobs, helped working families, done anything at all? When you look at the dire employment situation you would have to say no.

The old system has failed but no-one wants to see it die. They will continue to support obscene payouts to banks instead of looking for fresh ideas which is what we desperately need. The burden of all this spending will be a tax burden that the ordinary citizen cannot bear. Everything that is being done now is exacerbating an already awful situation.

We must cut out wasteful spending and start to use money in a more reasonable, prudent way. We also must allow markets to get through this crisis with a more competitive philosophy by allowing failed banks and businesses to actually shut down rather than trying to turn them into toxic zombies that endanger the entire world.


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 8:38 am
  

User avatar
Arlo Fanatic

Joined: Sep 13, 2000
Posts: 8521
Location: Pixley-- Actually An Hr South of Richmond, VA
Yeah, I think he'd like Barney Miller too. I read where his old lady liked Brady Bunch which is cool...


          Top  
Reply with quote  
 
Post new topic Reply to topic



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 15 guests


Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group