• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

George W. Bush Secretly Visits Fort Hood Victims

Dr_Patrick said:
obama_approval_index_november_10_2009.jpg


Considering that only 30% of Americans strongly approve of Obama's performance (according to Rasmussen's Daily Presidential Tracking Poll) I think it's pretty safe to say that most people are pretty disillusioned with the President and that this whole "Messiah" nonsense has run its course. Wouldn't you say?
Click to expand...

The strongly approve vs. strongly disapprove poll is misleading. If you go by only approve vs. disapprove, Obama has a good approval rating. Those who coat his approval in crap do a disservice to America, in that those who would like to see him hit the door will have a harder job of convincing people to go on the attack, because they will be thinking the the battle is already won. This is a war for the direction that America is going to take, and the first step in winning a war like this is to take an honest assessment, so that subsequent steps can target his weaknesses, and then attack the chinks in his armor. If the people think Obama has already lost, many are not going to fight as hard to remove him.

Just my two cents here.
 
danarhea said:
The strongly approve vs. strongly disapprove poll is misleading. If you go by only approve vs. disapprove, Obama has a good approval rating. Those who coat his approval in crap do a disservice to America, in that those who would like to see him hit the door will have a harder job of convincing people to go on the attack, because they will be thinking the the battle is already won. This is a war for the direction that America is going to take, and the first step in winning a war like this is to take an honest assessment, so that subsequent steps can target his weaknesses, and then attack the chinks in his armor. If the people think Obama has already lost, many are not going to fight as hard to remove him.

Just my two cents here.
Click to expand...


Yes, let's not take a look at trends concerning Obama....Interesting though that you seem to be saying that taking a critical look at him is doing a disservice to America....Why? Can't he stand up to scrutiny?


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Funny how Rasmussen is never used unless it can be perverted to make a liberal point.....


j-mac
Click to expand...

:rofl What liberal point would that be? That Obama's approval ratings aren't good?
 
UtahBill said:
Your point is made, NP, you hate Obama and won't miss an opportunity to compare him to anyone whose actions might make him look bad...
Enough, already....get another hobby...
Click to expand...

Pretty respectable hobby, I must say! All it takes is an open mind and common sense... Obama does the rest for those of us who are paying attention!
 
danarhea said:
The strongly approve vs. strongly disapprove poll is misleading. If you go by only approve vs. disapprove, Obama has a good approval rating. Those who coat his approval in crap do a disservice to America, in that those who would like to see him hit the door will have a harder job of convincing people to go on the attack, because they will be thinking the the battle is already won. This is a war for the direction that America is going to take, and the first step in winning a war like this is to take an honest assessment, so that subsequent steps can target his weaknesses, and then attack the chinks in his armor. If the people think Obama has already lost, many are not going to fight as hard to remove him.

Just my two cents here.
Click to expand...

I'm just saying that this whole "messiah" thing is old and that now a fair amount of people who voted for him or supported him before are disillusioned with his performance thus far.
 
Navy Pride said:
I think history will judge Bush as a very good president.........Much better then Clinton or Hussein Obama...........
Click to expand...

Indeed. The Iraq War was a great decision that helped us crush Al Queda, the Taliban who supported them, and capture Osama bin Laden. All the people and institutions who were responsible for the worst attack on American soil in world history have been brought to justice.

Really though, the Iraq War has been a disaster for the United States in almost every conceivable way. The worst one being that we're no longer considered a credible threat by any of our enemies; it is going to set the tone for how we are received by foreign powers for decades.

The United States is like a declining mob family. "You don't have that kind of muscle anymore," is about the only thing anybody has to say to us.
 
Last edited:
j-mac said:
Yes, let's not take a look at trends concerning Obama....Interesting though that you seem to be saying that taking a critical look at him is doing a disservice to America....Why? Can't he stand up to scrutiny?


j-mac
Click to expand...

Read my post again. I never said that a critical look can't be taken at him. Read my post again, only slower. Reading is fundamental.

What I said is that, if you post misleading polls, then people will be underestimating him, and that is the worst thing you can do. Underestimate him, then removing him will be a losing cause. Taking an honest look, and attacking at the chinks in his armor is the only way to do it. This is a war for the heart and soul of America, and we can't fight this war on false and misleading information. Obama, for what he is, is an enemy that is going to take a lot hard work to remove from office.
 
Morality Games said:
Indeed. The Iraq War was a great decision that helped us crush Al Queda, the Taliban who supported them, and capture Osama bin Laden.

Really though, the Iraq War has been a disaster for the United States in almost every conceivable way. The worst one being that we're no longer considered a credible threat by any of our enemies; it is going to set the tone for how we are received by foreign powers for decades.

The United States is like a declining mob family. "You don't have that kind of muscle anymore," is about the only thing anybody has to say to us.
Click to expand...

We are no longer a threat....because we are now broke, much like the soviet union of old. we are not broke because of wars, many of which I opposed, but because we spent money that we didn't have.

This is not the first time this has happened, and it will not be the last.
 
Jackboot said:
We are no longer a threat....because we are now broke, much like the soviet union of old. we are not broke because of wars, many of which I opposed, but because we spent money that we didn't have.

This is not the first time this has happened, and it will not be the last.
Click to expand...

No. It's about war.
 
Dr_Patrick said:
:rofl What liberal point would that be? That Obama's approval ratings aren't good?
Click to expand...



The very point you made in post #68, or at least tried to make when you said

"...that this whole "Messiah" nonsense has run its course. Wouldn't you say?"

See I find those in the Obama camp as well as the narcissist n chief quite thin skinned when it comes to pointing out the obvious flaws in the mans persona.

After all the same people that tout that it is passe to call the man Maobama, or Chairman, are the same people that not only called Bush much worse for much longer, but are the same ones that often resort to name calling whenever they think that some childish point can be made from it, or if they don't have the facts to back up their argument.

So, to answer, no it ain't old, hell, its just getting warmed up. So for what those that supported Bush for his terms had to put up with, you and those that are so hyper offended by the cute names, or think that Rasmussen isn't worth posting unless there can come forth a call to stop pickin' on your President, I say what goes around.....And all like that.


j-mac
 
Morality Games said:
Indeed. The Iraq War was a great decision that helped us crush Al Queda, the Taliban who supported them, and capture Osama bin Laden. All the people and institutions who were responsible for the worst attack on American soil in world history have been brought to justice.

Really though, the Iraq War has been a disaster for the United States in almost every conceivable way. The worst one being that we're no longer considered a credible threat by any of our enemies; it is going to set the tone for how we are received by foreign powers for decades.

The United States is like a declining mob family. "You don't have that kind of muscle anymore," is about the only thing anybody has to say to us.
Click to expand...

Horse****. We can still kick ass anywhere in the world.
 
danarhea said:
Read my post again. I never said that a critical look can't be taken at him. Read my post again, only slower. Reading is fundamental.
Click to expand...


Oh, oh yeah....That is the way to influence people, you must be a Dale Carnegie grad.


What I said is that, if you post misleading polls, then people will be underestimating him, and that is the worst thing you can do. Underestimate him, then removing him will be a losing cause. Taking an honest look, and attacking at the chinks in his armor is the only way to do it. This is a war for the heart and soul of America, and we can't fight this war on false and misleading information. Obama, for what he is, is an enemy that is going to take a lot hard work to remove from office.
Click to expand...


So what's so "misleading" about the poll? I think it shows several trends that could be talked about, like to take notice of the two intersecting line there, they seem to coincide with the anger expressed at the town halls this past summer....Yeah, thats right, that means for all the "American people want it" crap you hear from liberals, they really, really don't! That is just one. But suppose you tell me what you find misleading about the poll.


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
The very point you made in post #68, or at least tried to make when you said

"...that this whole "Messiah" nonsense has run its course. Wouldn't you say?"
Click to expand...

And it has, hasn't it? While admittedly many seemed star eyed by the guy during his campaign, the term "messiah" is a bit absurd, wouldn't you say? It's nothing more than partisan hackery. It got old after the first week. Now that the man has been President for nearly a year I think it's beyond old and time to perhaps move on.

See I find those in the Obama camp as well as the narcissist n chief quite thin skinned when it comes to pointing out the obvious flaws in the mans persona.
Click to expand...

You won't hear disagreements from me here. Obama hasn't exactly been doing a wonderful job thus far. I still fail to see how pointing out low approval ratings automatically means that I'm a Liberal who is trying to prove some twisted point.

After all the same people that tout that it is passe to call the man Maobama, or Chairman, are the same people that not only called Bush much worse for much longer, but are the same ones that often resort to name calling whenever they think that some childish point can be made from it, or if they don't have the facts to back up their argument.
Click to expand...

I thought that the nicknames for Bush were lame as well. Your point?

So, to answer, no it ain't old, hell, its just getting warmed up. So for what those that supported Bush for his terms had to put up with, you and those that are so hyper offended by the cute names, or think that Rasmussen isn't worth posting unless there can come forth a call to stop pickin' on your President, I say what goes around.....And all like that.
Click to expand...

Please point out where I used a nickname for Bush. Aww, but see...that will point out your flawed logic in trying to group all Liberals together and judge them all as a whole, wouldn't it?
 
reefedjib said:
Horse****. We can still kick ass anywhere in the world.
Click to expand...

You'll have to explain yourself a bit more. I don't really see how your enthusiasm compares well with our track record in Afghanistan/Iraq.

The war in Iraq has not cost us all much more then the recent stimulus package, you need to read more on this subject.
Click to expand...

I'm speaking purely in terms of our centrality in the international political network. Our debt does not hurt us there because the United States still generates a ton of capital; people tend not to worry about crediting a large debtor provided that debtor is still generating enough capital to pay the interest fees; the United States can still pay the yearly interest fees for all our debt, meaning in the long run people crediting us will make more money, probably even if we suddenly said we weren't going to pay back a single penny (provided they credited with us long enough). Most people who credit the United States don't want us to pay back all our debt at once, because then they will make less money over the course of a decade or two; that's how usury works.
 
Last edited:
Navy Pride said:
I think history will judge Bush as a very good president.........Much better then Clinton or Hussein Obama...........
Click to expand...
I think the history books are still open on Bush, but it does have the potential to actually look favorably on him.

The one thing that the history books will not overlook is his tendency to be rash. Some think that's a good trait, others don't.

texmaster said:
So Churchill wasn't human I guess. Or Roosevelt or Truman.

Hell, or Washington or Lincoln for that matter.


Your analogy is so full of holes it boggles the mind.
Click to expand...

What I am talking about is the human concept of responsibility. Hell, Nixon is without a doubt guilty for WaterGate yet he walked free.

My point is that Presidents in the United States are above every man-made law. The only real danger a President faces is that of not getting re-elected-- Big woop, they get to retire and still make more dough than the average soldier will in his/her life-time.
 
Morality Games said:
Really though, the Iraq War has been a disaster for the United States in almost every conceivable way. The worst one being that we're no longer considered a credible threat by any of our enemies; it is going to set the tone for how we are received by foreign powers for decades.

The United States is like a declining mob family. "You don't have that kind of muscle anymore," is about the only thing anybody has to say to us.
Click to expand...

Morality Games said:
You'll have to explain yourself a bit more. I don't really see how your enthusiasm compares well with our track record in Afghanistan/Iraq.
Click to expand...

I was commenting on your statements bolded above. Regardless of how Iraq and Afghanistan turn out, no one can come within a parsec of our ability to wage war anywhere on the planet. No one has a Navy or Army or Air Force to come close. The only way someone can effectively counter our strengths is irregular warefare on their home turf and we have gotten very good at COIN.

The fact is we beat the insurgency and the terrorists in Iraq. In 6 years! Nobody has ever been that successful against a terrorist organization. Not Algeria, not Vietnam. Iraq just passed an election law enabling Parliamentary elections to take place in January. They passed the open list provision, so Iran has limited influence over the election results. We have done quite well. Thanks to GWB.
 
Morality Games said:
You'll have to explain yourself a bit more. I don't really see how your enthusiasm compares well with our track record in Afghanistan/Iraq.



I'm speaking purely in terms of our centrality in the international political network. Our debt does not hurt us there because the United States still generates a ton of capital; people tend not to worry about crediting a large debtor provided that debtor is still generating enough capital to pay the interest fees; the United States can still pay the yearly interest fees for all our debt, meaning in the long run people crediting us will make more money, probably even if we suddenly said we weren't going to pay back a single penny (provided they credited with us long enough). Most people who credit the United States don't want us to pay back all our debt at once, because then they will make less money over the course of a decade or two; that's how usury works.
Click to expand...

Like I said, you need to study this subject, and I will not take this thread off topic. I would be happy to discuss this elsewhere, though.....
 
Arch Enemy said:
I think the history books are still open on Bush, but it does have the potential to actually look favorably on him.

The one thing that the history books will not overlook is his tendency to be rash. Some think that's a good trait, others don't.



What I am talking about is the human concept of responsibility. Hell, Nixon is without a doubt guilty for WaterGate yet he walked free.

My point is that Presidents in the United States are above every man-made law. The only real danger a President faces is that of not getting re-elected-- Big woop, they get to retire and still make more dough than the average soldier will in his/her life-time.
Click to expand...

Being decisive is often confused for being rash.
 
Dr_Patrick said:
And it has, hasn't it? While admittedly many seemed star eyed by the guy during his campaign, the term "messiah" is a bit absurd, wouldn't you say? It's nothing more than partisan hackery. It got old after the first week. Now that the man has been President for nearly a year I think it's beyond old and time to perhaps move on.
Click to expand...


Well, you are entitled to your opinion, but I think he still has a few more years to endure in that regard. Oh, and as long as there are those out there that call into shows like Wash Journal, or other talk shows and defend this mans failing policies no matter how they are killing this country, then yes "Messiah" fits, although I am partial to calling him something on the order of Franklin Delanobama.


You won't hear disagreements from me here. Obama hasn't exactly been doing a wonderful job thus far. I still fail to see how pointing out low approval ratings automatically means that I'm a Liberal who is trying to prove some twisted point.
Click to expand...


Did I say "you Dr. Patrick are a liberal"? I don't think I did, although being new here I have my doubts. I wouldn't put it past libs to openly tout themselves as one thing on their public profile and believe something else.


I thought that the nicknames for Bush were lame as well. Your point?
Click to expand...


Want a cookie?


Please point out where I used a nickname for Bush. Aww, but see...that will point out your flawed logic in trying to group all Liberals together and judge them all as a whole, wouldn't it?
Click to expand...



:rofl Classic! Please spend the rest of your day searching the archives for a sentence....Nah, I'll let you stand on your honesty, or lack there of which ever one it is. As far as Generalizing, liberals would never do that eh?


Shall I point out the names I have been called lumping me into a group just in the short time I have been here?


j-mac
 
Arch Enemy said:
That's true. But in the case of the Iraqi War being "decisive" or "rash" cost us dearly.
Click to expand...

It cost the enemy even more dearly. We took out 50,000 jihadists in Iraq. Dealt a severe blow to the jihadist community as a whole.
 
Arch Enemy said:
I think the history books are still open on Bush, but it does have the potential to actually look favorably on him.

The one thing that the history books will not overlook is his tendency to be rash. Some think that's a good trait, others don't.



What I am talking about is the human concept of responsibility. Hell, Nixon is without a doubt guilty for WaterGate yet he walked free.

My point is that Presidents in the United States are above every man-made law. The only real danger a President faces is that of not getting re-elected-- Big woop, they get to retire and still make more dough than the average soldier will in his/her life-time.
Click to expand...

Then next time don't just target one president if that truly was your point.
 
j-mac said:
Well, you are entitled to your opinion, but I think he still has a few more years to endure in that regard. Oh, and as long as there are those out there that call into shows like Wash Journal, or other talk shows and defend this mans failing policies no matter how they are killing this country, then yes "Messiah" fits, although I am partial to calling him something on the order of Franklin Delanobama.
Click to expand...

And there weren't people who still supported Bush regardless of what he did and how low his approval numbers were? Yeah, just Liberals do this...gotcha. :2wave:

Did I say "you Dr. Patrick are a liberal"? I don't think I did, although being new here I have my doubts. I wouldn't put it past libs to openly tout themselves as one thing on their public profile and believe something else.
Click to expand...

You alluded to it by saying that I posted the approval ratings to prove some twisted Liberal point did you not? Have your doubts all you want. I could really care less what you think. I just find it humorous that you assume.

Want a cookie?
Click to expand...

Again, your point?

:rofl Classic! Please spend the rest of your day searching the archives for a sentence....Nah, I'll let you stand on your honesty, or lack there of which ever one it is. As far as Generalizing, liberals would never do that eh?
Click to expand...

Liberals are just as guilty of it as Conservatives are. Both sides are full of ****.

Shall I point out the names I have been called lumping me into a group just in the short time I have been here?
Click to expand...

So that justifies you doing it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom