Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
lord_casek

Obama: The New George Bush

Recommended Posts

You fail to understand that no matter how much kicking and whining you do about being shown evidence here, it's not gonna change the fact that science, with few detractors and exceptions, supports climate change. I'm not gonna post links for you, this topic has been discussed here before and we've all been through that and it's a giant waste of time cause you're not gonna change your mind through links alone.

 

All I'm asking you to do is to sit down with real scientists in the field and discuss the subject. That's all. Online information is not inherently flawed, but online information combined with live discussion with real scientists is inherently superior to online information alone. Links won't change your mind, so I won't do that, but discussing with scientists may just work, so I ask you to try it out.

 

Also, it's completely preposterous to claim only "my" side profits from pushing "our" agenda, and completely ignore the profiting from "your" side, who has been profiting for ages, who desperately wants to keep the status quo, and who will continue to fight to keep things as they are. Don't get it wrong, "your" side is still on top and dominating, and making more money than "mine" right now.

 

It's obvious to me by now that your stance against the evidence of climate change stems more from the dislike of the liberal mindset that supports it and sometimes even exaggerates it, and thus you lean to believe the exceptions and detractors instead of the mountains of evidence presented by the large bulk of the scientific community.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This forum is supported by the 12ozProphet Shop, so go buy a shirt and help support!
This forum is brought to you by the 12ozProphet Shop.
This forum is brought to you by the 12oz Shop.

I don't support anyside. But once again you've failed to argue regarding the subject. You spoke with students not scientists so stop trying to suggest you have explored the science . Besides that's not the point of my argument. The thread is Obama the new Bush. As you suggest, and I agree with, and have indicated, politicians have been profiting from these scare tactics. There is truth in the science in support of and that which is in opposition to the theory of global warming. The fabrication and manipulation of these facts or data for control and profit is undeniable. You even suggested this in a previous post. Providing links to books, data, journals, editorials, is appropriate regardless if you find it to be valid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Obama was always going to suffer from a huge loss of support, he had swing voters and new voters coming out for him and they may not be as aware of how long that changes to running a country can take, because they haven't seen any real dramatic changes to the country they have lost faith and his popularity has taken a downturn, the same can be said for a lot of people their expectations of change was so dramatic especially as the first black president etc etc now it just seems like endless debates on healthcare and republican press picking up on so many things whether trivial or not.

 

I still think he was a better choice than the alternative of McCain and Palin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think Obama was always going to suffer from a huge loss of support, he had swing voters and new voters coming out for him and they may not be as aware of how long that changes to running a country can take, because they haven't seen any real dramatic changes to the country they have lost faith and his popularity has taken a downturn, the same can be said for a lot of people their expectations of change was so dramatic especially as the first black president etc etc now it just seems like endless debates on healthcare and republican press picking up on so many things whether trivial or not.

 

I still think he was a better choice than the alternative of McCain and Palin.

 

 

I think that people are waking up to the fact that he's not a Messiah and his promises were

that of a politician. Weak and baseless.

 

As for the McSame comment, I'm afraid I have to agree and disagree. As much as it pains me to say this, McCain would have been better b/c his evil is out in the open. We would have been quick to dole out justice and impeach, imprison, etc.

 

I hope people get that statement and don't mistake it for supporting McCain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I get you Casek, that is the problem with all politicians you have to take the good with the bad I would personally prefer an independant non affiliated person to run a country, then they have the option of choosing their policies based on merit rather than say a political 'left/right' bias.

 

I don't really think you will see huge changes in Obama's term simply because it is hard to make major changes withiin a very short time, I think towards the end of his term you will see the changes being implemented having been debated and argued and refined through the houses. But people definitely thought he was some messiah who on his first day would click his fingers and make America better, and they are disillusioned now that hasn't happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh I get you Casek, that is the problem with all politicians you have to take the good with the bad I would personally prefer an independant non affiliated person to run a country, then they have the option of choosing their policies based on merit rather than say a political 'left/right' bias.

 

I don't really think you will see huge changes in Obama's term simply because it is hard to make major changes withiin a very short time, I think towards the end of his term you will see the changes being implemented having been debated and argued and refined through the houses. But people definitely thought he was some messiah who on his first day would click his fingers and make America better, and they are disillusioned now that hasn't happened.

 

 

I think that people are scared. Jail time for not having insurance, etc. is just damn right scary. I think that we, as a country, have been disillusioned for a long time running.

 

The "change" that was promised isn't "change" at all. It's Bush era bills on steroids. Just

my humble opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You spoke with students not scientists so stop trying to suggest you have explored the science

 

 

Grad students, professors, and NASA JPL scientists. Go back and read.

 

I'm also lumping Phd's and post-docs in the "grad student" category. But who cares, open-minded discussion with students > narrow-minded internet research.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if you look at it constitutionally, the president cant change as much as everyone thinks he can. sure he has the bully pulpit, he can push people around, make deals to get shit through congress...etc. but look at what he was saying he would do when he was campaigning.

 

the only promise he could really live up to, without any other people 'getting in the way' is the war. he could start bringing the troops home TOMORROW. he could refuse to enforce patriot act provisions, military commission act, essentially cease the war on drugs, he could disband the ATF, etc. i dont know why he doesnt concentrate on shit he CAN do, instead of worrying about some stupid inefficient boondoggles like healthcare and global warming crap. we all know atleast 50% + of any govt spending is wasted, squandered and doesnt accomplish the job at hand. everything the government does is based on the fact that they MUST fail, in order to increase the budget. the incentives are totally backwards than that of the market. in the market, if you satisfy your customers, you make money. in the government, if you dont satisfy your 'customers' you make money. no budget increases are given to operations in govt that do what they are supposed to. they are only given out if you FAIL. have they ever seen a budget they didnt need to increase?

 

i cant wait till yall get your healthcare you want. as hl mencken said.... democracy is people knowing what they want and they deserve to get it good and hard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
if you look at it constitutionally, the president cant change as much as everyone thinks he can. sure he has the bully pulpit, he can push people around, make deals to get shit through congress...etc. but look at what he was saying he would do when he was campaigning.

 

I think this fact is being overlooked by a lot of people. We all learned about checks and balances in elementary school, and yet everyone expected Obama to be able to hammer through sweeping changes the second he got into office. He IS like Bush in that they both have had to come to terms with the reality of the institution of the presidency, which for the most part requires slow, careful compromise to get things done.

 

I think what promises Obama did make while campaigning were taken and blown all out of proportional by the media and by his supporters. People projected their own beliefs and desires into the Obama campaign, but from the very beginning he has been more of a brooding, moderate intellectual type, not a vicious firebrand ready to change the world. I can remember articles from 2006 that painted him in a more moderate light, and this is the way I've viewed him the entire time. I didn't even vote though.

 

the only promise he could really live up to, without any other people 'getting in the way' is the war. he could start bringing the troops home TOMORROW. he could refuse to enforce patriot act provisions, military commission act, essentially cease the war on drugs, he could disband the ATF, etc. i dont know why he doesnt concentrate on shit he CAN do, instead of worrying about some stupid inefficient boondoggles like healthcare and global warming crap.

 

Well, he never promised to pull out of Afghanistan, and to my knowledge he already pulled lots of troops out of Iraq, and is looking for ways to pull out of Afghanistan without totally fucking the place up. He also pulled the DEA off medical marijuana users/dispensers, which is a pretty huge deal where I live. Also healthcare and global warming aren't "stupid inefficient boondoggles" in my mind, but that's another argument entirely.

 

To be clear, I'm not a major Obama supporter, but I think he's a pretty smart guy and he's still getting the hang of the presidency. I just think a lot of criticism in here is very unfair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Well, he never promised to pull out of Afghanistan, and to my knowledge he already pulled lots of troops out of Iraq, and is looking for ways to pull out of Afghanistan without totally fucking the place up. He also pulled the DEA off medical marijuana users/dispensers, which is a pretty huge deal where I live. Also healthcare and global warming aren't "stupid inefficient boondoggles" in my mind, but that's another argument entirely.

 

To be clear, I'm not a major Obama supporter, but I think he's a pretty smart guy and he's still getting the hang of the presidency. I just think a lot of criticism in here is very unfair.

 

i watched a youtube video of him campaigning last week where he said he was going to 'bring all the troops home!' to cheers and shouts.

he pulled troops out of iraq, put them in 'stan and replaced all the troops he pulled out with contractors. that is not bringing anyone home. unless you are a politician.

 

i still stand by what i said 100% if he wanted to, he could do ALOT. he has it within his capacity to bring the troops home NOW. he can basically render the patriot act and other things like that null and void by refusing to enforce them.

 

i do give him some respect for pulling the DEA off of medical marijuana facilities, but we'll see what really happens with all this. he could cease the entire war on drugs if he wanted to. as andrew jackson said in response to a supreme court ruling...'well he has made his decision, now let them enforce it.'

 

these are the only things i could possibly find common ground with the guy on, and he is no different than bush on the war. so i really dont have common ground with him on anything. his socialism, class warfare rhetoric and policies, anti gun stance.. are all hideous and trample what little liberty americans have left.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Grad students, professors, and NASA JPL scientists. Go back and read.

 

I'm also lumping Phd's and post-docs in the "grad student" category. But who cares, open-minded discussion with students > narrow-minded internet research.

 

Reiterating what you said and changing it is no different than me editing a post of mine, which you arrogantly suggested was hypocritical. Personally I don't care if you were endowed with some infinite wisdom from god. You still have failed to provide anything that is substantial to back your opinion. Just implying that you spoke with someone and they told you you were right does not make it so. The fact that you KEEP coming back to this point is becoming annoyingly redundant. Taking my statements out of context is not helping you prove any point either. If you haven't noticed the subject has shifted slightly back to what the thread was intended for. the Obama administration and the similarities between the Bush administration. If you read one of the last statements I made in response to you I appealed to your argument that there was the possibility for political corruption with this issue. It seems strange that you would accept the opinion of some students or professors (as if your really going around some campus that your not a member of and interviewing all of these professors about this issue). The fact is that there a great deal of professors, scientists, PHD's or what have you, that contest the theory of global warming. Providing evidence based on college articles, or books, etc that are written by Phd's and post-docs in the "grad student" is not narrow minded. How could you suggest it to be so when you supposed opinion is based off of similar sources.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because when you have an open discussion with a real person, you can do these amazing things like ask questions, provide feedback, explore various angles, and in essence reach a better understanding of an issue than you ever would by just passively reading and absorbing information and taking it at face value.

 

Look dude, don't bother arguing this any more. Stick to the political aspect and lay off the science. There's pleeeeeenty to be argued about and discussed about what political motives are doing to the issue without having to delve into discrediting the science of it. It diminishes your argument greatly when you do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again, the last several posts spoke to the political aspect of this issue, so WTF are talking about? To discuss the politics and falacies of the propaganda requires delving into the science. At no point did I point to science being the basis for my argument. As you've suggested you disgree with my opinion, but that is all you've said. Everything you've said is baseless and has just been an attempt to discredit my opinion without actually backing what you've said. As a matter of fact you're the one that brought up science by claiming you've been bestowed with this knowledge by osmosis. Actually reading and researching different sides to an issue from credible sources carries more weight than talking to few people at a school

 

But, I digress. It seems your ability to objectively view this discussion or to see the failure of your logic has won. The fear mongering and politicization of environmentalism has also won you over. The trampling of our freedoms seems not to concern you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i watched a youtube video of him campaigning last week where he said he was going to 'bring all the troops home!' to cheers and shouts.

he pulled troops out of iraq, put them in 'stan and replaced all the troops he pulled out with contractors. that is not bringing anyone home. unless you are a politician.

 

i still stand by what i said 100% if he wanted to, he could do ALOT. he has it within his capacity to bring the troops home NOW. he can basically render the patriot act and other things like that null and void by refusing to enforce them.

 

i do give him some respect for pulling the DEA off of medical marijuana facilities, but we'll see what really happens with all this. he could cease the entire war on drugs if he wanted to. as andrew jackson said in response to a supreme court ruling...'well he has made his decision, now let them enforce it.'

 

these are the only things i could possibly find common ground with the guy on, and he is no different than bush on the war. so i really dont have common ground with him on anything. his socialism, class warfare rhetoric and policies, anti gun stance.. are all hideous and trample what little liberty americans have left.

 

 

AMEN TO THAT!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i watched a youtube video of him campaigning last week where he said he was going to 'bring all the troops home!' to cheers and shouts.

he pulled troops out of iraq, put them in 'stan and replaced all the troops he pulled out with contractors. that is not bringing anyone home. unless you are a politician.

 

I think the ultimate goal is probably still to bring them all home, but he can't (and shouldn't) just snap his fingers and make that happen immediately. He inherited a mess in Iraq and Afghanistan, and I don't think he wants to do anything rash to fuck the region up even more by pulling out and leaving a power vacuum. I'm not a military expert, but I think Obama is trying to take the advice of his experts and do what he thinks will work out the best; he's not just applying some abstract ideal to the situation. The situation is pretty complicated.

 

i still stand by what i said 100% if he wanted to, he could do ALOT. he has it within his capacity to bring the troops home NOW. he can basically render the patriot act and other things like that null and void by refusing to enforce them.

 

Well do you really want a president who simply does things because he can? You're just saying he has the power to do some things YOU want him to do, and doesn't. Good for him, I'm glad he doesn't take rash, unilateral action on issues. He should take other perspectives into account and weigh the pros and cons, since his decisions are very important, and we don't live in a dictatorship. Remember the Ents...

 

i do give him some respect for pulling the DEA off of medical marijuana facilities, but we'll see what really happens with all this. he could cease the entire war on drugs if he wanted to. as andrew jackson said in response to a supreme court ruling...'well he has made his decision, now let them enforce it.'

 

I agree that the entire war on drugs should end. But I understand it would be a hugely controversial and probably unpopular decision. Ending federal prosecution of medical marijuana was a long time coming. But our government acts slowly, and other drugs are still a much thornier issue.

 

these are the only things i could possibly find common ground with the guy on, and he is no different than bush on the war.

 

Remember, Bush started both wars. Obama inherited a very delicate situation. HUGE difference there.

 

so i really dont have common ground with him on anything. his socialism, class warfare rhetoric and policies, anti gun stance.. are all hideous and trample what little liberty americans have left.

 

Well you're bringing a whole suite of preconceived notions to the table here that I can't even begin to address. I'm tempted to say this echoes Fox News, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mainframe: I've said it before, and I will say it again: Afghanistan is for the opium. Our troops are guarding the fields. Before the "invasion", the Taliban had virtually stopped the trade....now it's quadrupled.

 

Something like 90% estimated....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AOD sentiments to not echo the views of a media empire. These fears and views are based on protecting the constitutional freedoms we possess. And they are very real, not preconceived notions. When we won the war with Britain we established these rights to protect our individual freedoms, and Bush and Obama have slowly chipped away at them. Lets remember something here, Bush did not start a war. Congress must give authorization for this to happen, and thats what took place. And the war in Afghanistan had EVERY member of congress back it, to include Obama. The president has limited executive power, which in just about every case can be overridden by Congress, so it's not as if he just wages war like the dictators of so many nations in this world.

 

Obama campaigned on refocusing the war to Afghanistan. The war on drugs is not just a domestic issue, and as a matter of fact several DEA agents were just killed in Afghanistan of all places. Talk about imperialism. I don't think AOD is suggesting that Obama just do these things with the snap of a finger, nor do I think he is in favor of these things. Rather he is pointing out that Obama campaigned on these issues, and the notion of change. Yet he has not made these changes and apparently conservatives are not the only ones that are becoming increasingly skeptical of this guy and lack of integrity. I was somewhat impressed with the interview Obama did with Major Garrett from Fox News. He danced around the issues as could be expected, but he seemed to be honest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Soaker.. do you ever manage to get out from this thread and just go and paint? Please don't tell me you think Palin has potential.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

soaker summed it up pretty good.

but i'll make a few more comments.

 

I think the ultimate goal is probably still to bring them all home, but he can't (and shouldn't) just snap his fingers and make that happen immediately. He inherited a mess in Iraq and Afghanistan, and I don't think he wants to do anything rash to fuck the region up even more by pulling out and leaving a power vacuum.

 

people inherit messes all the time. obama has it well within his grasps to be instituting policies to end the overseas occupations of these countries. he campaigned on it. one of his main constitutional functions as president is to be commander in chief of the armed forces. end of story.

we are fucking up the region by being over there! this is the stated reasons of the terrorists that attacked our country on 9/11. what would we be doing if china, north korea and russia had military bases in canada, mexico, oklahoma, florida and washington state? this is the problem. blowback. reaction to our intervention in the middle east they hate us for it.

 

we are causing more problems being over there than if we withdraw right now. if the policy is bad, atleast try to attempt about thinking about ending it. obama's overall stance is the same as any mainstream republican or democrat. US intervention in to areas we shouldnt be in. whether its fighting a 'symptom' called terrorism in 'stan, in iraq, or going on humanitarian missions that the democrats favor. it is all needless, senseless foreign intervention that the founding generation so warned us about. beware of entangling alliances.

 

to blame the war solely on bush is stupid. a democratic congress gave bush authorization, though not a declaration of war, to take action over seas in iraq and 'stan. when ron paul suggested that perhaps maybe we ought to think about putting up a declaration of war to a vote... he was laughed at. but this is what is supposed to be done... constitutionally speaking. we havent declared war since WW2. and look. we are still fighting the korean war today!

 

Well do you really want a president who simply does things because he can? You're just saying he has the power to do some things YOU want him to do, and doesn't. Good for him, I'm glad he doesn't take rash, unilateral action on issues. He should take other perspectives into account and weigh the pros and cons, since his decisions are very important, and we don't live in a dictatorship. Remember the Ents...

 

first off, if we are engaged in an unconstitutional war, ending it, is not irrational. i dont want a president doing things outside of his constitutional mandates. hell, i think america would be better off with out a president, and if we still had the articles of confederation. the constitution is a gigantic failure in restraining the central government. what i am saying is, if you campaign on bringing home our boys over seas, you dont sent 50K more over there, as well as replace troops in iraq with contractors. im just saying, just like a typical leftist (not to exclude the hypocritical righty, but we are talking about obama here)he says one thing and does another.

 

the anti war leftist base that elected obama, should be holding his feet to the fire about this war. i even heard that crazy anti war group is now 100% behind obama's war, but when bush was fighting the war, they were against it. why the double standard. democrats like democrat wars and republicans like republican wars.

 

I agree that the entire war on drugs should end. But I understand it would be a hugely controversial and probably unpopular decision. Ending federal prosecution of medical marijuana was a long time coming. But our government acts slowly, and other drugs are still a much thornier issue.

 

its a shame that following the constitution is hugely controversial.

but you are right. it is hugely controversial, which is why it should of never been federalized in the first place. then there wouldnt be a central authority unconstitutionally trying to run the lives of 300 million people and what plant substances they can and cannot possess or consume. the 9th and 10th amendment state that all powers not delegated to the federal government in the body of the constitution are rights reserved to the people and the states. last time i checked, there wasnt any thing in the enumerated powers that say the US is supposed to have a federal police force regulating drugs and arresting people who have certain plants that the government doesnt like.

 

if the constitution were followed each state and/or locality would decide the fate of its citizens. the states that had no drug laws, would attract the druggies and the states with anti abortion laws would attract the christians. no need for a central authority to plan the lives of 300 million diverse people in america.

 

Remember, Bush started both wars. Obama inherited a very delicate situation. HUGE difference there.

 

considering most democrats authorized the iraq war ('voted for it before they were against it,' remember) and supported the patriot act and other infringements on our liberty. it just so happened bush was in office when this all went down. obama may of inherited a war, but obama has it within his power, to literally at the snap of his finger, to bring the troops home tomorrow. yet he is increasing fighting forces. so much for that 'change.'

 

Well you're bringing a whole suite of preconceived notions to the table here that I can't even begin to address. I'm tempted to say this echoes Fox News, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

 

obama is a socialist. bush is a socialist.

 

as FA hayek pointed out... socialism in the US means not just governments attempting to take over the means of production, it means egalitarianism at any cost. this means a progressive heavy income tax on the rich productive classes, to redistribute lower non productive classes. vast restrictions on individual freedoms, especially gun ownership. best not to allow the 'enemies of the revolution' have any means to attempt to keep their liberty in tact. it means intervention in the freedom of the market place to attempt to centrally plan the entire economy. socialism lost the calculation debate a long time ago. the great socialist experiment that was the USSR, went belly up. Mises showed how socialism always must fail, and he was proven right. keynes has been discredited in more ways than one can count, yet his ideology rules most economists and government advisors.

 

i could care less what a corporate media network has to say, although i must admit i'd rather watch judge napolitano on fox, than anyone else on any other network.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sooflies! It reopened!

 

I keep thinking about those furniture store commercials

where the store is "going out of business" continuously

for years on end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HA! I just saw one of those stores down the street. For the whole year they had this going out of business sales, then yesterday they had some grand opening event...

 

Add Guantanamo to the list of "executive orders" that have been broken.

 

Good summation AOD. The government is delusional, thinking that they are in control of the economy, the drug trade, and even other nations. In his interview Obama suggested how he was to credit for the economic recovery, which is a complete lie, and that job growth will pick up because of the great job he is doing. Basically patting himself on the back fo shit that is not happening. Sadly there are those that believe this guys propaganda...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
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.


×
×
  • Create New...