Obama warned Republicans to quit listening to Limbaugh if they want to get along with Democrats [modified]

Mike Gaskey

Oakman wrote:

The U.S. is neither Venezuela nor Bolivia and assuming that it will follow the same path they did is pretty much on a par with assuming that the form of government prevalent under Jefferson would would today.

not at all. people are people and you get what you pay for. we've made a signicficant down payment on socialism and we're about to pay for the failing of society to teach the young that they and they alone are responsible for thier own success, hands are out and wallets waiting to be filled. society hads brought us to this sad state of affairs by: distorting history taught in our schools, eliminating the concept of failure by giving awards for showing up and not scoring atheltic contests, making play "safe", and on and on and on. the current situation with our tax structure with only roughly 50% of workers paying income tax with an earned income tax credit ($3,000 or more) recieved IF YOU PAY NO INCOME TAX exacerbates the school and parental failings. combine all the above with a "leader" who cut his teeth on radical literature and you have a willing partner to Chavez and Morales and an electorate ready to roll with him. I sincerely wish I were wrong but I've lived long enough to have an understanding of how people will react. I repeat, I hope he fails because if he doesn't, we do.

Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.

Oakman

BoneSoft wrote:

We shall see.

Trust me. It isn't. I can prove it. The equator is south of here.

BoneSoft wrote:

As soon as he starts quieting dissention in the media (talk radio & FNC mainly), nationalizing more industries, confiscating land, rewrite parts of the Constitution istead of just ignoring it, or placing his own people in key positions in the military, then I'll really start to worry.

But that's already been happening for the last four years. :confused: (except for rewriting parts of the Constitution instead of violating it)

BoneSoft wrote:

If that makes me a traitor,

In Stan's opinion you should be taken out and shot.

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

Jim Crafton

Stan Shannon wrote:

"Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it."

Which could probably be applied just as much to Limbaugh, Coulter, et al, as anyone else. He spent all 8 years of Clinton's Presidency doing just that. Granted I'm not sure I'm so kean on Slick Willy anymore, but Limbaugh is an ass.

¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog Laugh: Dercas si Mreps Yreve

Oakman

Mike Gaskey wrote:

we've made a signicficant down payment on socialism and we're about to pay for the failing of society to teach the young that they and they alone are responsible for thier own success, hands are out and wallets waiting to be filled.

You misunderstand me. I don't deny that there are changes being made right now in our socio-economic system (many of which I am unhappy with) that will be hard or impossible to undo. I just don't think the result will be a thugs-on-top one-man rule type of government as is prevalent in South and Central America whether the guy on top is considered right or left wing. (And there have been plenty of both. Hell, if Eisenhower had spoken Spanish, we might have El Presidente Castro as one of our staunchest right-wing allies.) However, the House and Pelosi are the holder of the purse and the American people have given them all of power they need. Obama may be in league with 'em or fighting a rear-guard action or totally dismayed as his plans are destroyed by her. Ultimately it doesn't matter. It probably wouldn't have mattered if McCain had been elected. The choice isn't between us going more socialistic and returning to some glorious days of yesteryear when "sound as the dollar" meant something; the choice is between more socialistic and what we have now going on and on and on. I'm old enough and finacially stable enough that I can probably outlast even a ten year global depression, but an awful lot of people - good hard working people who don't have their hands out - aren't. The question isn't about how we got here (you and I agree about that in large part.) The question is whether we do nothing (50,000 job cuts were announced today according to FNC) or something. I have always believed that doing nothing was not a survival trait.

Mike Gaskey wrote:

I've lived long enough to have an understanding of how people will react.

And I've lived longer enough to know that the future cannot be predicted. I have no reason to believe that you have been annointed a prophet any more than I have been. ;)

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

Lost User

Yes sir, "I hope Obama fails", that's what I call support!! About as much support as CP has for vb6 posts...

Stan Shannon

If that were true I wish more conservatives would follow Limbaugh's lead. Limbaugh, coulter et al, are not in policy making positions. They are mere pundits. Obama applies those rules as a means of achieving an actual political agenda from the inside in a seat real power. He, like the democrats, are relentless, ruthless and fanatical in the pursuit of that agenda. I wish my side had that kind of tactical resolve. I admire it.

Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

Stan Shannon

EliottA wrote:

Yes sir, "I hope Obama fails", that's what I call support!! About as much support as CP has for vb6 posts...

Yes, but as we all know, rooting for the failure of your political opponents is the greatest form of patriotism.

Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

Lost User

that, and foxnews has a reputation for quoting people exactly as they speak. Such a credible news source aren't they.

Lost User

Stan Shannon wrote:

If that were true I wish more conservatives would follow Limbaugh's lead. Limbaugh, coulter et al, are not in policy making positions. They are mere pundits. Obama applies those rules as a means of achieving an actual political agenda from the inside in a seat real power. He, like the democrats, are relentless, ruthless and fanatical in the pursuit of that agenda. I wish my side had that kind of tactical resolve. I admire it.

It's amazing how stupid some people can be. Try to understand that being "democratic" isn't a black and white thing, neither is being Republican. You're pro-life, they're pro-choice. You're pro-gun, they're pro-restriction. Half of your own country is "democratic", the other half is "republican", about 50% of each side doesn't know what the fuck it means to be either, but hate the other side either way. Furthermore, another 15% on top of that probably has traits bestowed in the core fundamental principles of either republican or democratic. Dumbasses.

Stan Shannon

Oakman wrote:

In Stan's opinion you should be taken out and shot.

Isn't that what you are supposed to do with traitors?

Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

Stan Shannon

EliottA wrote:

You're pro-life, they're pro-choice. You're pro-gun, they're pro-restriction.

Well, for my part, I'm neither "pro-life" "pro-abortion" "pro-gun" or "pro-restriction". I am basically just an "anti-" kind of guy.

EliottA wrote:

Half of your own country is "democratic", the other half is "republican", about 50% of each side doesn't know what the fuck it means to be either, but hate the other side either way. Furthermore, another 15% on top of that probably has traits bestowed in the core fundamental principles of either republican or democratic.

I think things divide up pretty much in a traditonal way. You have a third thats fairly firmly committed to one side or the other, and understand the issues pretty well. Than you have a third which we call "the center" which has no strong ideological foundation but sort of forces those on the extremes to temper their policies to gain their vote one way or another. In the last few election cycles the conservatives were successful at making the liberals look more extreme, in this last election the reverse happened.

Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

modified on Monday, January 26, 2009 8:32 PM

BoneSoft

It is supportive of America (at least one could argue). Much like hoping Al Qaeda fails, or the Institute for Policy Studies fails. Depends on what you're supporting. ;)

Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.

BoneSoft

Yes, compared to most others, they are a shining beacon of truth. Of course, the others don't set the bar very high, do they.

Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.

BoneSoft

So we've been told for about 8 years. :laugh:

Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.

BoneSoft

Oakman wrote:

Trust me. It isn't. I can prove it. The equator is south of here.

Yes, their geologies are easy. But you'll have a much harder time finding distinction between the idiologies of Chazev, Castro, Morales and Obama. Silencing dissenting media? Confiscating land? Nationalizing huge swaths of the private sector, is Bush largest screw up by leaps and bounds. But he's out, he obviously wasn't setting himself up as a socialist dictator.

Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.

Oakman

BoneSoft wrote:

So we've been told for about 8 years

You want to reflect on 2002 when Bush's approval rating was in the 90's and rethink that? Certainly there were some who opposed Bush from the get-go, but they were few and far between. Bush and Kennedy were getting along just fine back then and Clinton voted with him far more often than not. I was glad to have Bush as my President then - and given the fact the the alternative was Gore, I guess I still am. However, he screwed the pooch by himself without help for the media or the Democrats. He turned out to be the worst war president we've had - exceeding even Wilson who spent most of WWI in a semi-coma. (OK, if you want to remind me that Cheney and Rumsfeld helped him, I'll agree.) The b.s. that Bush spent eight years being shit on by the media is exactly that. During the first 2 - 3 years, the vast majority of his coverage was positive. The vast majority of the people of the U.S. hailed him as a good man and a good president. In other words, he had a chance, a good chance, and he blew it. Any rewriting of history that claims otherwise is a flat out lie. His final approval rating was an accurate assessment by the people of the United States of a man who probably tried hard to do the right thing, but just wasn't up to the job.

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

Oakman

BoneSoft wrote:

It is supportive of America (at least one could argue). Much like hoping Al Qaeda fails, or the Institute for Policy Studies fails. Depends on what you're supporting.

You may think you were being cute, but if you do not understand the difference between the President of the United States and Al Qaeda, I suggest you need to try living in Afghanistan where the two are waging a war against each other.

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

BoneSoft

Oakman wrote:

You want to reflect on 2002 when Bush's approval rating was in the 90's and rethink that? ... The b.s. that Bush spent eight years being sh*t on by the media is exactly that. ... Any rewriting of history that claims otherwise is a flat out lie.

Who's talking about the media? The media are the absolute LAST people who will be dogging Obama. We were talking, I thought, about us lowly peons. There are still to this day a lot of morons running around bitching about Bush stealing the elections. Both elections.

Oakman wrote:

However, he screwed the pooch by himself without help for the media or the Democrats... (OK, if you want to remind me that Cheney and Rumsfeld helped him, I'll agree.)

Correct. I won't argue at all.

Oakman wrote:

His final approval rating was an accurate assessment by the people of the United States of a man who probably tried hard to do the right thing, but just wasn't up to the job.

Yet some still argue for 9% Peloci and Ried. But again, I won't argue. However, if it makes you feel better, I'll change that to "So we've been told for the last 6 years". It doesn't diminish my point.

Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.

Oakman

BoneSoft wrote:

The media are the absolute LAST people who will be dogging Obama. We were talking, I thought, about us lowly peons.

I think you better leave Limbaugh in the media class - call him a lowly peon and he is liable to blow his cigar smoke in your face - or even worse, cut the (Limbaugher) cheese.

BoneSoft wrote:

There are still to this day a lot of morons running around bitching about Bush stealing the elections. Both elections.

Sure and at least, in the case of the first election, a lot of that bitching is aimed at the supreme court. Are you saying that all of the criticism of the supremes comes from the left?

BoneSoft wrote:

Yet some still argue for 9% Peloci and Ried

Sometimes I think those two are a perfect example of Congress ignoring the will of the people. You must know some Democrats - I'd be very surp[rised if they think highly of those two. (Unless you live in Utah or San Francisco)

BoneSoft wrote:

However, if it makes you feel better, I'll change that to "So we've been told for the last 6 years". It doesn't diminish my point.

But doesn't it make a case for giving Obama a chance before calling for a revolution?

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

BoneSoft

Oakman wrote:

I think you better leave Limbaugh in the media class

I did. I was talking about us peons.

Oakman wrote:

Are you saying that all of the criticism of the supremes comes from the left?

Umm... No. I'm saying that plenty of people have been bitching about Bush for the last 8 years.

Oakman wrote:

Sometimes I think those two are a perfect example of Congress ignoring the will of the people.

Yes. But I find it very interesting how often Bush's meager double digit approval rating comes up and Congress' 9% rarely does. Perhaps somewhat jerk-knee for me to mention it.

Oakman wrote:

But doesn't it make a case for giving Obama a chance before calling for a revolution?

To call for revolution? Yes. To not feel compelled to 'get on board'? Nope. His campaign promises were enough. I don't have to watch and catch him in the act of perpetrating them. And when he does, then we can talk counter-revolution. A little uprising to let him see the difference between the working class of reality and the proletariat of his Marxist teachers.

Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.