Which would you rather have?
Which would you rather have?
For what? I already know if I want fries, or not.
"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"
Cicero Marcus Tullius
Meh, 6 in one, half dozen in the other.
You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo
Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
Bush was bad, but Obama is worse, and for the same reasons.
Bush spent too much, but Obama spends more.
Bush borrowed too much, but Obama borrows more.
Obama kept these and added profiling.
Obama hasn't reformed Fannie and Freddie. Instead he tried to reinflate the housing bubble with the $8k tax credit.
If you expect people to be rational, you aren't being rational.
1) Exactly how would Obama get rid of Patriot Act that congress passed and and Bush signed into law? Or is Obama the King not the president?
2) We have purchased 2 homes in the past 7 years. And we made a offer in on a third last month that is process now. We had the highest offer of 13. W/O stating the exact price and estimate on building a new equivilant, the 5 year old house from scratch is basically double our offer. Where is the new bubble?
It is amazing how simplistic some people see the real world. Neither was elected King, though BushII must have thought so with his 'Gawd put me in the White House' crap.
BushII borrowed his money to launch wild 'defense' spending, while Obama is spending trying to keep us out of another Great Depression.
I can't be happy for the continued abuse of Civil Liberties but can only imagine what the right wing ranting would be if any of the 'anti-terrorist' laws were repealed and an attack so much as caused a stubbed toe here in the states. Yet another surrender liberal, left us defenseless, stripped away the tools to save us....and all that rubbish.
Now the housing bubble was fueled by insane levels of speculation, scrapping the bottom of the barrel to loan out money, and totally soulless mortgage bundling. The tax credit can't match that mess.
Well i never expected anything from Bush. He never came across as bright or capable, though his cronies sure helped him take advantage of public fear. Obama on the other hand is the great disappointment of my life so far. I'm not sure he's worse at governing, pretty much the same really. He campaigns on the left, telling them what they want to hear, while governing on the center-right. The governing is what matters. The one thing he did that made any difference, that wasn't compromised to near oblivion was ending DADT, and even that came at the expense of extending tax cuts for the wealthy. He's had to deal with a congress that's so shamefully unworthy and self-serving that I could not overstate their uselessness, but still he rarely takes the position i voted on him for from the onset.
Hearing that story of his mother having to spend her final days haggling with insurance companies, I thought for sure he will fight to end them. Instead we get a mandate to give them more business! He should have started with single payer, something worth spending so much time and political capital for. Instead we got town halls and "death panels" and senators acclaiming the "best health care system in the world," that thoroughly humiliated and exposed the country and for what? 50 million are uninsured, costs keep going up and his damn bill may get struck down even. The point of him not being king to instantly remove Gitmo and Patriot Act etc is correct, but he certainly has authority to end Afghan/Iraq wars that have become too ridiculous to comment on. He certainly could at least attempt to reverse Bush policies or lash into them with his mesmerizing speaking ability. I question that he really wants to though, which is disappointing. He didn't want to look bad if after repealing them we were attacked...May as well wave a white flag right now.
Making the Repubs look like fools in filibuster sessions would be far more admirable than bowing down to this new 60 votes to pass anything. The filibuster of the Civil Rights bill sure made them look like hateful asses, and some of this might have then actually passed. If Obama of all people, considering his massive popularity in 08, cannot pass anything worthwhile then why do we have a president? Or senate? Why go through the motions anymore? He could have taken a real stand on so many things at this critical time that already have popular support: SSM, wealth inequality, tax loopholes, college costs. In 08 i thought he was a genuine leader who might transcend politics. The real shame will be when like 30% show up to vote because he's let so many down and the Repubs are even worse.