Presidential failure

[Urbanoutlaw]

Raybob's Best President topic is starting to look like bit of a slugfest, so here's a place where you discuss what you

think they got wrong.

If you post here, put a little thought into it & be ready to back it up.

Things like "BUSH SUCKS OBAMA FTW LOLOL" will be considered SPAM & treated as such. Nothing personnel at

the younger members from outside the US, but arguments like "my chemistry teacher said" & "blah blah blah

Americans" will be summarily dismissed. SEE ABOVE LINE.

I'll even through out the first one.

Bush (Jr) - Those of you who've been around enough to know me a little are probably surprised at that one, I'll

explain. I still firmly believe he was the right man in the right place at the right time 9/12/01 & did the right thing

going into Afghanistan & Iraq. But one thing just digs at me.

Gas prices, he said... NOTHING! Dude, WTF?!?! Why didn't he get serious about our own domestic rescorces? I

firmly believe the price of gas a direct contributor to our current economic problems. People would have a little

more than to spend on things like pizza & going out, giving others jobs who in turn will spend a little more.... See

the pattern? That's how it worked in the '80s.

Alaska - Oil reserve comparable to all of OPEC, off limits due to federal regulation (non introduced by Alaskans).

Off shore drilling - Estimated to be as much as in Alaska. Many drilling platforms sitting idle needing repair/refit.

The permits alone to do this cost more than building a new platform. How is that environmentally friendly?

Eastern US coal reserves - Yet another huge reserve. US Air Force has been looking seriously looking at coal based

jet fuel.

Finally, at about $4 a gallon we started to consider these rescorces. We should have been looking at this by $2 &

by$3 there should have been executive orders to tap these rescorces. I'll save ethanol, bio diesel, solar & wind for

another time.

Don't worry, I've got plenty on Obama & Clinton. Let the games begin!

Edited February 20, 2009 by Urbanoutlaw

[Kitsune Inferno]

My main beef with Bush is the No Child Left Behind Act. Students and teachers hate it to no end. Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't schools whose standardized test scores don't improve have their funding withheld? Way to make the problem worse.

[Urbanoutlaw]

My main beef with Bush is the No Child Left Behind Act. Students and teachers hate it to no end. Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't schools whose standardized test scores don't improve have their funding withheld? Way to make the problem worse.

The theory was sound enough, perform or you don't get paid. My experience w/ the public schools & especially the

special education programs leaves me a little unsympathetic. In the '80s there was a minor epidemic of big city kids

graduating from high school unable to read enough to fill out a simple job application & almost no math skill. Not

saying it's right, just why.

In actual practice a lot of teachers just don't care about their students. For whatever reason their attitude is burned out

from being little more that free babysitters stuck w/ a bunch of someone else's screw-up kids so they just show up, punch

a clock & sluff through the day. When the kids fail, the local school board & teacher's unions say it's government's fault

for not throwing enough money at it.

I'll give you that one, all they wound up doing was take resources from the few teachers in the problem schools &

gave an excuse to the bloated sacks running the schools.

[Vercetti Thug]

Wow, i expected Bush and Iraq to be mentioned in the first few posts of this topic. I know that we all know the situation there, so I won't bother explaining it again. Anyone feel like bashing/supporting Bush on that one?

[tilly]

Going into Iraq might not have been so bad if he didn't lie about it for 3 years.

[Little_Chestnut]

My main beef with Bush is the No Child Left Behind Act. Students and teachers hate it to no end. Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't schools whose standardized test scores don't improve have their funding withheld? Way to make the problem worse.

The theory was sound enough, perform or you don't get paid. My experience w/ the public schools & especially the

special education programs leaves me a little unsympathetic. In the '80s there was a minor epidemic of big city kids

graduating from high school unable to read enough to fill out a simple job application & almost no math skill. Not

saying it's right, just why.

In actual practice a lot of teachers just don't care about their students. For whatever reason their attitude is burned out

from being little more that free babysitters stuck w/ a bunch of someone else's screw-up kids so they just show up, punch

a clock & sluff through the day. When the kids fail, the local school board & teacher's unions say it's government's fault

for not throwing enough money at it.

I'll give you that one, all they wound up doing was take resources from the few teachers in the problem schools &

gave an excuse to the bloated sacks running the schools.

The real problem with the no child left behind act is that all the schools care about now is the standardized test. All of my high school education was spent doing practice tests every day in at least one class. No one learned anything aside from how to take tests and test theory. This is in no way what school is supposed to be.

[Urbanoutlaw]

Going into Iraq might not have been so bad if he didn't lie about it for 3 years.

What lie? If you're talking about the weapons of mass destruction, we are talking about someone who deployed nerve

gas on his own people, in itself a WMD. Between this & links to the 9/11 attacks (provided aid to Bin Laden & allowed

him to train terrorists in Iraq) Bush acted in the best interest of the US based on the best intel we had at the time.

Congrats to Saddam Hussein for hiding them & they may never be found.

You probably also expected me to defend Bush on this one.

Did you expect this from Obama, considering part of his campaign was getting our military out of foreign countries?

(note this one is from CNN, the guys who loved to hate bush)

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/17/oba...oops/index.html

[rappo]

I think going into Iraq was a big mistake on Bush's part. I agree that Saddam Hussein was a bad person who needed to be brought to justice, but I don't think that a full-fledged war was completely necessary on America's part. To me, killing Iraqi people in order to get to a man that killed so many Iraqi people just seems ironic and downright wrong. I realize that the intelligence at the time seemed to convince George Bush that Hussein was brewing up some big stuff, but that intelligence was pretty much discarded by everyone but the US. I do believe Bush had ulterior motives for going to war with Iraq, and he used this "intelligence" as well as the grief and patriotism of Americans after September 11 to carry out his plan. His decision perpetuated America's image as the world police, and worsened Middle Easterners' views of the US. George Bush lost sight on the real war on terror, which was to find Osama bin Laden and dismantle Al Qaeda and the Taliban... instead he wasted American lives and resources in Iraq. In the end, all of this helped George Bush earn the lowest approval rating of any president.

Edited February 21, 2009 by rappo

[Pandora]

Bush (Jr) - Those of you who've been around enough to know me a little are probably surprised at that one, I'll

explain. I still firmly believe he was the right man in the right place at the right time 9/12/01 & did the right thing

going into Afghanistan & Iraq. But one thing just digs at me.

Agree.

Gas prices, he said... NOTHING! Dude, WTF?!?! Why didn't he get serious about our own domestic resources? I

firmly believe the price of gas a direct contributor to our current economic problems. People would have a little

more than to spend on things like pizza & going out, giving others jobs who in turn will spend a little more.... See

the pattern? That's how it worked in the '80s.

But this is the one thing I just don't understand about Americans. These so called high gas-prices. Though I have to agree that the US has a potentially large influence in this sector, it doesn't mean the people have to go crazy about it. Like let's just be honest now, the prices weren't that high. If anything, relatively low. At some point in time, we were paying 8,30 USD per gallon. (with a EURO to USD rate of 1,4. In those days the rate actually was 1,55. So it would have actually been higher). And really, the government didn't say a thing. They were thinking about increasing taxes (and more on oil products). Did anyone here care? Well, no. People were just like "Oh, that's quite much. But meh."

But that's just about all the complaining about prices. Of course, if you've got the resources like the US has, then it might be wise to use it. On the other hand, 4 USD isn't bad at all. The government might have just wanted to wait with using these precious resources until the prices get.. well, higher.

Wow, i expected Bush and Iraq to be mentioned in the first few posts of this topic. I know that we all know the situation there, so I won't bother explaining it again. Anyone feel like bashing/supporting Bush on that one?

I support. I truly believe it was for the better good. So, it took it's toll and in a sense, it still is. But we already can see huge improvements in the region.

Yes, Bush sort of lied a few times. But I'm not looking at those things, I'm merely looking at the actions taken and I support almost every singly one of them (which I know of). As he said in his 'Ultimate' Exit Interview, people will probably see that it was a wise decision later in time. Other then that, Obama.. who wants the troops to all move out. Well, it seems his generals don't agree with it at all. And come on, who knows it better when it comes to these things? The neat, well-spoken president, or people like Petraeus?

[Spaz The Great]

Gas prices, he said... NOTHING! Dude, WTF?!?! Why didn't he get serious about our own domestic resources? I

firmly believe the price of gas a direct contributor to our current economic problems. People would have a little

more than to spend on things like pizza & going out, giving others jobs who in turn will spend a little more.... See

the pattern? That's how it worked in the '80s.

But this is the one thing I just don't understand about Americans. These so called high gas-prices. Though I have to agree that the US has a potentially large influence in this sector, it doesn't mean the people have to go crazy about it. Like let's just be honest now, the prices weren't that high. If anything, relatively low. At some point in time, we were paying 8,30 USD per gallon. (with a EURO to USD rate of 1,4. In those days the rate actually was 1,55. So it would have actually been higher). And really, the government didn't say a thing. They were thinking about increasing taxes (and more on oil products). Did anyone here care? Well, no. People were just like "Oh, that's quite much. But meh."

But that's just about all the complaining about prices. Of course, if you've got the resources like the US has, then it might be wise to use it. On the other hand, 4 USD isn't bad at all. The government might have just wanted to wait with using these precious resources until the prices get.. well, higher.

Things are entirely different in America than they are in England/UK/Europe/etc. For one, our economy is weak as hell. Most of us in America((who aren't rich as hell)) are struggling to get by, keep houses, cars, jobs and such in our possession. The gas prices being that high was killing us.

[Urbanoutlaw]

The big thing that people in Europe forget is that until a couple years ago gas was about $1 a gallon, since the late

'70s. A sudden 400% spike is the problem & it's not because any change in supply, just pure greed.

Large scale agriculture uses a lot of petroleum based fuels at every step & the US exports to almost every corner of

the world. Consider how much fuel prices have driven up the price of grain & produce exported to Europe.

WE ARE ALL GETTING SCREWED!!!

[rappo]

Yeah when you grew up seeing gas prices at $1.00/gallon it's a bit outrageous to be getting giddy about finding gas for $4.55/gallon as I was doing last summer

Edited February 22, 2009 by rappo

[tilly]

What lie? If you're talking about the weapons of mass destruction, we are talking about someone who deployed nerve

gas on his own people, in itself a WMD. Between this & links to the 9/11 attacks (provided aid to Bin Laden & allowed

him to train terrorists in Iraq) Bush acted in the best interest of the US based on the best intel we had at the time.

Congrats to Saddam Hussein for hiding them & they may never be found.

You probably also expected me to defend Bush on this one.

Did you expect this from Obama, considering part of his campaign was getting our military out of foreign countries?

(note this one is from CNN, the guys who loved to hate bush)

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/17/oba...oops/index.html

Well Jesus Christ! You've solved it! I'm assuming you met the terrorists too, since you know so much about how Hussein trained terrorists in Iraq and how he linked to 9/11.

It's an assumption.

What is true is that the terrorists were from the Sunni group Al Qaeda, which is just as related to us as it is to Iraq.

Sure he used mustard gas on his people back in 88 (wait, that was 20 years ago!), but so have many many other countries for many years, and I definately wouldn't call that a weapon of mass destruction, comparing it to the nuclear bombs we and Russia owned in the cold war.

Look at the majority of Africa right now. Much much worse has been going on there than has ever happened in Iraq. Not only is there a genocide going on in a number of countries, but it also contains some of the poorest countries in the world. Why aren't we sending troops there? Oh, no oil. I get it.

And Obama is not going to just take every troop out instantly, if he is going to take them all out he still needs a plan. It might be great and it might go completely wrong, but hopefully it will have a plan, unlike the Bush's surge. The difference between the surge of Bush and Obama's increase is that Obama has extraction in mind, while Bush had seek and destroy.

[Urbanoutlaw]

Well Jesus Christ! You've solved it! I'm assuming you met the terrorists too, since you know so much about how Hussein trained terrorists in Iraq and how he linked to 9/11.

Another liberal smartass who picked up a bong instead of a newspaper. Let me introduce you to an obscure source

you may not be aware of (82 separate stories. Their archive is only going back 5 years, but if you read through

you'll get the idea) -

http://topics.cnn.com/topics/al_qaeda_in_iraq#aCurrentPage

Sure he used mustard gas on his people back in 88 (wait, that was 20 years ago!), but so have many many other countries for many years, and I definately wouldn't call that a weapon of mass destruction, comparing it to the nuclear bombs we and Russia owned in the cold war.

(Wiki source, will dig further if necessary)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Anfal_Campaign

When is irrelevant, Hussein engaged in in genocide on his own people. Al-Anfal + al Qeada presence = BAD.

Look at the majority of Africa right now. Much much worse has been going on there than has ever happened in Iraq. Not only is there a genocide going on in a number of countries, but it also contains some of the poorest countries in the world. Why aren't we sending troops there? Oh, no oil. I get it.

Not a direct threat to the US. We hear enough bitching about Afghanistan & Iraq, do you really think we need more

wars?

And Obama is not going to just take every troop out instantly, if he is going to take them all out he still needs a plan. It might be great and it might go completely wrong, but hopefully it will have a plan, unlike the Bush's surge. The difference between the surge of Bush and Obama's increase is that Obama has extraction in mind, while Bush had seek and destroy.

Not only is Obama not going to just take every troop out instantly, he just ordered 17,000 more into action.

If you're not going to bother yourself w/ legitimate sources, kindly lurk.

[tilly]

Not only is Obama not going to just take every troop out instantly, he just ordered 17,000 more into action.

If you're not going to bother yourself w/ legitimate sources, kindly lurk.

I actually don't know for sure if he has a plan for this specific surge, but I'd imagine he would. The previous present and the current president have very different motives in mind(Destroy the evildoers < Get our troops out), and that makes all the difference.

In fact I wasn't even in favor of Obama being the democratic representative, but he is exponentially better than McCain-Palin.

You like links so: Obama's plan

Not a direct threat to the US. We hear enough bitching about Afghanistan & Iraq, do you really think we need more

wars?

And Iraq and Afghanistan(I suppose you mean Taliban/Osama Binladen), the places US gave weapons to are the direct threats to US?

Iraq had a genocide(Bosnia, Africa, Ukraine, must I go on?) and Afghanistan had Taliban, which is as much of a threat to us as an African nation. The only threat we ever had was with Al qaeda, which is an international group.

I guess you could say Hezzbollah was a threat, but didn't we help Iraq create Hezzbollah?

But to sum it up, I don't want another war, I just don't understand why if we are in Iraq and Afghanistan why we can't be there too? I'm trying to explain that we are not there for the reason many may think. Just like previous wars, the media's lies and propaganda will keep the people distrait while the government does what they are actually there for. But like those wars, we will learn the real truth a few years after the war is over. Perfectly planned out.

Just for you: Iraq Timeline

Another liberal smartass who picked up a bong instead of a newspaper. Let me introduce you to an obscure source

you may not be aware of (82 separate stories. Their archive is only going back 5 years, but if you read through

you'll get the idea)

Another presumptuous cock who speaks of not what he knows.

If you could, show me the part where it says "Hussein housed terrorists, aided Binladen (Hey, he's just like us), and then hid the terrorists(which I presume is not his country because insurgent=/=terrorist), and kept them hidden after he died."

Thanks.

When is irrelevant, Hussein engaged in in genocide on his own people. Al-Anfal + al Qeada presence = BAD.

'When' is not irrelevant. Who was in presidency at that time? WHAT! HIS DAD!? No wai.

What is funny about this is that after Desert Storm, Bush senior made a decision to keep Hussein in Iraq to keep the balance between the Middle-eastern countries.

And again, Al Anfal is not even close to the genocides of Bolsheviks in Ukraine and Kazakhstan, JNA in the Balkan region, the Turks and Kurds in Armenia, Syria and Greece, the Pakistanis in Bangladesh, Kampuchea in Cambodia and the list goes on and on. Plus, Al Anfal happened 21 years ago. Why suddenly go 15 years later with reason to find the WMDs, saying "We know where they are"?

African genocides are going on right now. Isn't prevention better than justice? Justice doesn't bring back all of the dead people.

And what did Bush know about the Al Qaedan presence and where did he get it from? What about his sources? I'll show you what I do know he got most of his sources from: PNAC (Each letter is a different link)

And a site for every document, letter, website, and article of and from the PNAC: <3

So much for "intelligence officials."

I suggest watching the documentaries, "Hijacking Catastrophe" and "Outfoxed." And make sure you actually watch them, not just look them up and proclaim them "Liberal nonsense," or whatever you guys call things against the 2000-2008 government.

Edit: Link problem.

Edited February 25, 2009 by tilly

[Spaz The Great]

I just LOVE how everyone yells at everyone about how they are "blind" and "fed lies, brainwashed, following the herd" etc. etc. etc. Both sides of these types of arguments claim the other didn't get the facts, usually because of "hidden motives" and shit like that. But I must ask, why are you((the other side)) so informed? How do you know your information is so correct?

Answer? You don't. Don't yell and scream about misinformation if you aren't even sure your information is correct((and neither of the sides can come on and say ANYTHING about how their sources are true. Everyone lies. Everyone twists reality. Everyone wants you to believe their right, regardless of the truth)).

And that, my friends, is the definite truth.

[tilly]

I just LOVE how everyone yells at everyone about how they are "blind" and "fed lies, brainwashed, following the herd" etc. etc. etc. Both sides of these types of arguments claim the other didn't get the facts, usually because of "hidden motives" and shit like that. But I must ask, why are you((the other side)) so informed? How do you know your information is so correct?

Answer? You don't. Don't yell and scream about misinformation if you aren't even sure your information is correct((and neither of the sides can come on and say ANYTHING about how their sources are true. Everyone lies. Everyone twists reality. Everyone wants you to believe their right, regardless of the truth)).

And that, my friends, is the definite truth.

Watch CSPAN instead of CNN or FOX.

Use quotes, reports and documents from the people themselves, directed towards other politicians or cabinet members. Don't use media biased op-eds, interviews or columns that could be 100 percent lies.

No matter what side, left or right, links to CNN or Wikipedia are not proof at all.

Hearing the words straight from the horses mouth is more like it.

[Spaz The Great]

Just because Wikipedia CAN be wrong doesn't mean it's ALWAYS wrong. Besides, if there is a source linked in the Wikipedia article, you can't just dismiss it because it's from Wikipedia.

[rappo]

Another presidential failure committed by many: unwavering support of Israel. I'm waiting for the day when a president will finally realize that both sides of the Arab-Israeli conflict are at fault, and stop their continual support of Israel against the "terrorists." In a weakening economy, I understand it may be hard to turn down money (and I'm sure Israel pours in a lot of it), but it's time to start putting morals before profit, and stop funding a government that treats some as second-class citizens. I'm hoping that Obama will address this in his presidency, but I don't know how much he can change.

[Urbanoutlaw]

I actually don't know for sure if he has a plan for this specific surge, but I'd imagine he would.....

Your imagination must be powerful.

You like links so: Obama's plan

The one legitimate news source you quote & it's more of Obama's empty talk. He has repeatedly demonstrated

he can't be taken at his word. You like C-SPAN, dig around their archives & compare his campaign promises to

what he's actually done in his first month.

Your links are just to left-wing opinion pages, which I find no more credible than you would anything from Hannity or

Limbaugh. Again, dig around C-SPAN.

And Iraq and Afghanistan(I suppose you mean Taliban/Osama Binladen), the places US gave weapons to are the direct threats to US?

Presume you mean the former friendships w/ Hussein & Afghanistan. Once they were allies, Iraq at war w/ Iran &

Afghanistan at war w/ the USSR. Yes, we supplied aid & weapons, until they turned on us.

'When' is not irrelevant. Who was in presidency at that time? WHAT! HIS DAD!? No wai.

What is funny about this is that after Desert Storm, Bush senior made a decision to keep Hussein in Iraq to keep the balance between the Middle-eastern countries.

When IS irrelevant because it was the same leader in Iraq. Bush Sr. recognized what a mess it would be going into

Iraq & at the time the worst thing they did was attack an allie, Kuwait. Yes, it WAS for oil, you should know firsthand

just from living in the US what high oil prices do to our economy. This changed after 9/11.

And again, Al Anfal is not even close to the genocides of Bolsheviks in Ukraine and Kazakhstan, JNA in the Balkan region, the Turks and Kurds in Armenia, Syria and Greece, the Pakistanis in Bangladesh, Kampuchea in Cambodia and the list goes on and on. Plus, Al Anfal happened 21 years ago. Why suddenly go 15 years later with reason to find the WMDs, saying "We know where they are"?

And again, these conflicts are not a direct threat to the US. All through the '80s we kept hearing about how the poor

people in Africa were starving to death by the millions, so we skipped lunch & gave a few bucks. Then we found out

a group of petty warlords were intercepting the shipments & we had to send in the military just to get food to starving

people. We have enough problems of our own.

I suggest watching the documentaries, "Hijacking Catastrophe" and "Outfoxed."

Got anything by Michale Moore while you're at it?

Another presumptuous cock who speaks of not what he knows.

Again w/ being a smartass. After leading off w/ "Well Jesus Christ! You've solved it!" what did you expect, seriously

what did you expect? You come in & start hurling insults, unprovoked & are surprised that I say something? Name

one time I have EVER shown you this kind of disrespect. Work on your people skills.

I'll make this simple, If you can't make an intelligent argument w/out hurling insults, DO NOT POST HERE.

I have wasted all the time on this that I am going to.

-------------------------------------------------------------

rappo - You get a lot of bang for your buck on that one, you could claim that all the way back to Truman.

I'm short on time so I'll have to get back to this one.

[rappo]

rappo - You get a lot of bang for your buck on that one, you could claim that all the way back to Truman.

heh yeah, I know. the only president who has even confronted that issue is Carter, and he did it way after his presidency so that didn't really mean too much

[Urbanoutlaw]

To Carter's credit, he did bail Clinton out a time or two on foreign policy issues.

Quick reference on Israel - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel

..... both sides of the Arab-Israeli conflict are at fault .....

That's probably the most intelligent thing anybody's said on the subject. The Arabs want the Israelis out, the Israelis

want to be left alone & no matter what either side does it just escalates. Modern Israel was established when the UN

decided to divide Palestine, so any blame could start there.

We have it pretty easy compared to Israel, we have occasionally dealt w/ attacks. Israel is surrounded by people

that hate them just for existing. People who can't understand simple things like don't throw rocks at guys w/ guns.

Arabs are pissed off over Israeli occupation of Gaza & the West Bank, totally forgetting they lost that land in the

failed attempt to wipe out the Israelis. The Israelis respond w/ increased force which in turn just pisses off the

Arabs even more.

Another quick reference - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War

Recently, I heard of a Dr Fadl, Formerly a major figure in al Qaeda until caught & put in prison for life. Fadl gets

it & now renounces terrorism. Maybe people like him will finally solve this.

Dr Fadl - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayyed_Imam_Al-Sharif

Right, wrong or indifferent, we (the US) decided a long time ago that Israel is our friend. If anything, we're guilty of

sticking by a friend.

[rappo]

Well then I think it's time for the US to rethink its friends Britain gave up the land at just the right time for the UN to snatch it and give it away. I think it was a bit wrong to do that and if anything, Israel should have been created somewhere in Germany. However they wanted to get their promised land, so that's what happened. I don't think any blame needs to be put on the UN, what's done is done, and there is no changing the fact that Israel will exist in the Middle East for a long time. I do think, though, that something needs to be done about how they treat their neighbors. The situation there is a never-ending circle: Israel treats Palestinian citizens poorly, Palestinians bomb Israel, Israelis level Palestine, repeat cycle. Just because you have the power to destroy a very much weaker enemy, doesn't mean you should. I'm sure the US could have leveled Afghanistan after 9/11 but at least showed some responsibility by realizing the entire country is not to blame for the attacks, and that it's possible to weed out a select number of people rather than air-striking universities. If Israel is such a good friend of the US, then it's up to the president of the US to teach them how to deal with these sorts of things. Obama has expressed interest in talking with Iran's president, and I hope he'll extend the same invitation to other leaders in the Middle East soon.

[Urbanoutlaw]

I'm a couple hours early but here's my take on Obama's first 100 days. I know a few of you are going to be pissed

about what I have to say, but if you know me at all then you know I can't just sit by w/out saying something. Yeah,

I'm one of those "White Redneck Tea Party Extremists". For the record, it was a bit hard holding my criticism for the

whole 100 days, but did you really think I wasn't going to say anything?

Consider the following as the ranting of a nut w/ 2 quarters...or not.

Well, here we are. Obama has had his first 100 days.

EPIC FAIL.

Granted, I decided against Obama the night he won the Democratic nomination. He sounded like a jabbering idiot

making the "breathalyzer' speech less than a month after a 3-week vacation in Hawaii, which he took during what

even then was called the most historically significant US presidential race. Joe the Plumber didn't help him, a simple

working guy from Ohio who made the mistake of asking Obama what to expect in taxes if elected. Caught w/out his

true love, teleprompter, he revealed he was for redistribution of wealth. In retaliation, Obama's people launched a

full investigation & background check resulting in undue attention from the IRS, a snag in his plumber's license

(resulting in being unemployed) & a traffic ticket from the mid '80s. If someone running for President will treat you

like this for asking a pertinent question this is NOT the person to run the country. His choice of VP wants to turn over

401k accounts to Social Security & remove any tax advantages. While at a political fund raiser he ripped the US for

being greedy & taking up a large portion of the world's rescorces while his wife ordered lobster snacks from room

service, at $80 a plate.

I've accepted a long time ago that Social Security will be depleted long before I'm supposed to retire. No mention

of removing the tax penalties for early withdrawal or adding a hardship provision.

But the combined mentalities of Bob the Builder (YES WE CAN!) & liberal white guilt (Change we can believe in)

prevailed.

YES, I SAID IT!

The Irony here is that Obama has no slave blood, both his parents come from outside the US. In fact, his birth

records were sealed last fall so no one's completely sure if he's even a citizen. Not voting for someone based on

their skin color is racism. Not voting for someone based on their public statements & actions IS NOT.

In the defense of these people, at least they got off their asses & voted. Voter turnout wasn't anything to brag

about & most of the brain-dead lemmings stayed home. Of the ones voting for Obama a surprising number can't

properly name his VP.

IF YOU VOTED OBAMA & ARE LOOKING THAT UP, YOU ARE A BRAIN-DEAD LEMMING. Please, go run off a cliff somewhere.

Here's a few highlights from the first 100 days of Obama.

1) "My Brother's Keeper" - My ass. His eloquent inauguration speech proclaimed how he cares & wants to look out

for us. He keeps his brother in the outskirts of Nairobi, living in the equivalent of a Home Depot garden shed on about

$12 a year, w/out so much as a bathroom. "He's happy there"? If nothing else, there are huge security concerns if

Obama really cares about his brother & someone grabs the guy to pressure him. On the other hand, his Aunt didn't

like Kenya & now lives in a housing project in the US as an illegal immigrant. Is it really too much trouble for the

President of the US (who is personally worth $millions) to pick up a phone, call the Government of Nairobi & request

some sort of government job for his own brother? Buy his own brother a modest house? The Aunt could move there

w/ George & solve two embarrassing problems at once. What does this tell you about his view on family?

Yeah, I'll look out for my own family as you've done such a great job on yours.

2) Porkulus - He promised during his campaign to "read every bill line by line" & "eliminate earmarks. Total spending

w/ interest puts that one at about $1.3 TRILLION, passed as an "emergency measure" so it could not be read aloud in

Congress or the Senate. Speaker Polosi (the one w/ the jet we pay for) said this had to be done immediately or the

US would lose "500 million jobs" Most recent census puts the population of the US at about 310 million (about half of

which couldn't be bothered to vote). People wonder why I bash public schools. It also included an earmark from

(soon to be former) rep Chris Dodd protecting the AIG bonuses.

Taxes = (Insert insane number here.)

3) Omnibus - Right on the heels of Porkulus he approved a new budget including 8500 MORE earmarks & increasing

from the last budget of Bush. Earmarks include $30 million for a marsh mouse, $2 million to promote astronomy in

Hawaii & $1.8 million to study why pig manure smells bad. Pig manure smells bad because it releases methane as

the result of the pig digesting food. That money would have been better spent researching a cheap reliable way to

collect & bottle methane. It can be used like propane, making it a good farm commodity, probably taking a chunk

out of farm subsidies & SAVING a few $million out of the yearly budget.

So much for "line by line".

4) Overall spending - In less than 2 months Obama outspent EVERY pervious administration from Washington to

Bush Jr, combined. The Chinese government is lecturing ours (w/ good reason) about all the spending. The

Congressional Budget Office projects topping $10 trillion by 2019. Instead of taking control of the bailouts,

"change" apparently means take every last dime from taxpayers & piss it away as quickly as possible.

Our kids & grandkids get the bill, so much for his promise of "pay as you go".

5) Cabinet appointments - How can any of these people justify demanding that we pay taxes when they can't be

bothered to? Seriously, WTF!? Tim Gietner is his Treasury Secretary, in turn running the IRS. But he can't

accurately fill out his own tax return? Tom Daschell, up to nearly $160k, a lot of it under tax laws he help pass.

Killafer, Sebalius.... Even his cheif of staff, Rohm "dead fish" Emmanuale (called this because he actually sent

someone a dead fish, a lowbuck mafia wannabe) is in the middle of Blogo's scandal where he tried to sell the

Senate seat vacated when Obama was elected. Blogo will probably walk when the case is thrown out because he

can't mount a proper defense. All his key witnesses are in the currant administration & can't testify due to national

security reasons. NBC is negotiating a deal w/ Blogo for a reality show where he's paid $80k a week.

Fair credit where fair credit's due, he's definitely outperformed not just Bush but BOTH BUSHES & REAGAN COMBINED

in his first 100 days in appointments w/ serious ethical questions.

6) US Treasury Department - It's 100 days in & there's still a dozen major positions not filled. But Tim "Turbo Tax"

Gietner has a great plan, if a US business looks like it "might impact the economy" he wants the authority to take it

over, hire & fire key personnel as he sees fit & set salary caps. Hitler much? If you're faced w/ a huge paycut (90%?)

would you stay in the US? The Camen Islands sound nice. The tax code has gotten so complicated the guy running it

can't fill out his own tax return but God help you if you make a mistake. Not seeing much change there anytime soon.

"Turbo Tax" Geitner also put together the AIG bailouts last fall, including the bonuses.

BTW Tim, PAY YOUR F***ING TAXES!!!

7) US auto industry - For the first time in US history, a President fired the CEO of a major US company. Where in

the constitution does it say ANY government official has the authority to do that? That is up the board of directors

at the company in question & they saw no cause for such action in the last 5 + years. As a side note, under Rick

Wagner's direction GM was building the lean green cars government has been demanding. Obama also ordered

Chrysler to merge w/ Fiat if they wanted any assistance. We're ONLY going to give them US tax dollars IF they

merge w/ a foreign company? I'm just going to be blunt, there's a reason Fiats aren't imported to the US in

significant numbers.

As of last week Pontiac is officially a dead brand, RIP, the rest of GM may follow soon. Fiat is getting a trophy wife.

8) Nationalization of US banks & industry - Some of our banks tried to refuse the bailouts but were pressured into

them. As a result the US government now has stock & voting rights in private banks. Again, where does the

constitution give any authority to the US government to do this.

The good news, you're a millionaire! The bad news, that's not worth much!

9) World Apology Tour - After the epic screwjob we got from OPEC, he bows to one of their leaders? Why don't you

shine his shoes while your at it. Also buddying up to Castro, Chavez & Akmadenijad (all w/ atrocious human rights

records). I literally could not care less about correctly spelling the above mentioned persons. He also decided he

wanted to open relations w/ the Taliban (commentary from the lovely ladies in 3...2...1...). Over the last weekend

video of the public execution of two people by Taliban thugs was released, their crime under Sharia law, having an

affair. Their sentence, summary & w/out trial. He publicly proclaims the US as an "arrogant nation" but doesn't

acknowledge the good we've done. Little things,like World Wars 1&2, the Berlin Airlift or all the times we've been

the first to respond to such disasters as droughts, earthquakes, floods.... Or that we take in refugees from all over

the world. He fails to list our achievements or how far the US has come in less than 250 years, from rebellious

colony of the British Empire to the world Superpower.

Yeah, we're just "downright mean".

10) Somali Pirates - Directly addressing the Mearsk Alabama, Obama acted exactly as he should have, although he

deserves no special credit. It could be argued that action was slow but it could also be argued that it took several

days to get the perfect shot. Obama's failure here is in that it could have all been avoided. The US military knew

where pirates were operating from & had a viable plan to wipe out their bases of operation, but Obama refused to

approve it.

Ironically the Mearsk Alabama was carrying food & relief supplies for several African countries, including Somalia.

11) Bush Advisers - Let's get those mean Bush people who said it was okay to be mean to those poor 9/11 terrorists.

Only a complete idiot wouldn't see what's wrong w/ this. Okay, you do this & you'll be shooting yourself in the ass.

Any adviser from now on will hesitate because the advice they give will be figured on whether or not the next

President is going to try to put you in jail over it.

The immediate staff of future Presidents will make the Treasury Department look crowded.

12) Nationalized Healthcare - Ever since Clinton we've heard accounts from Canada about their system running out

of money at the end of the year. More recently there's been reports from the UK about people being denied life

prolonging drugs for cancer. Before you (in Canada/UK) proclaim "B***S***!" I'll point out that a lot of these

accounts come firsthand from internet friends in Canada & UK. People are immigrating to the US for better health care.

Yes we take them & help...wait a sec, I thought we were "downright mean".

At least now I know what he promised Hillary so she would play along.

13) Cap & Trade - I can't believe a sane rational person would vote for this guy if they heard his take on this one. A

day before the election I heard RAW & UNEDITED sound bites of Obama promising "The very nature of my plan will

cause electric rates to SKYROCKET." That was directly from him (probably one of the times he left the teleprompter

at home). We don't pay enough for electricity? Those nice compact florescent light bulbs that are supposed to save

the world? The factory in Tennessee that made them was shut down, apparently because of environmental issues.

They're now imported from China & we have seen how much the Chinese government cares about the environment.

We'll soon be able to say the same about coal. Another Obama allie, Feinstein recently commented on a Mojave solar

project "I don't want that UGLY thing in MY desert!" Obama said nothing about this. For "Earth Day", he took Air Force

One halfway across the country & several jaunts on Marine One burning a couple thousand gallons of fuel.

WTF is going on w/ this? Doesn't sound very "green" to me.

Obama can take his mindless Obamatons, their tofu, "Smart" cars & arm-chair socialism & get the hell up outta my country.

Signed - The URBANOUTLAW.

Edited April 29, 2009 by Urbanoutlaw

[_Ray]

That was probably the best post ever to be put up on this website.

They had one last night where the White House secretary had a conference in which he was asked so many questions he should've (but didn't) know the answer to, that it was just unbelievable. Just one more thing I found quite Sad: Obama wanted every picture of Jesus or Christianity covered up in his trip to Georgetown.

Edited April 29, 2009 by raybob95