• 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!

Frustrated liberals want more from Obama [W:299]

Glad you can finally admit that Obama hasn't lived up to his hype.

That was all the thread was about, like I said.

I didn't say hype. I said expectations. And I did that before we even started talking.

But YOU started another conversation and then pleaded wrong topic to get out of your mess. I fully understand. :coffeepap
 
Someone thinks they are far more clever than they really are....Isn't that right Boo...*nudge, *nudge

j-mac

PS, I ain't talkin' 'bout Billy either....
 
I didn't say hype. I said expectations. And I did that before we even started talking.

But YOU started another conversation and then pleaded wrong topic to get out of your mess. I fully understand. :coffeepap



Why is this always the tactic of the Libby. I was on topic, you on the other hand attempted dragging a "red herring" across the debate trail, trying to lead the topic somewhere else.

Hype or expectations, President Obama isn't the leader he sold himself as, and we all bought the glam and glitter but what we gold was "fools gold".
 
Last edited:
Why is this always the tactic of the Libby. I was on topic, you on the other hand attempted dragging a "red herring" across the debate trail, trying to lead the topic somewhere else.

Hype or expectations, President Obama isn't the leader he sold himself as, and we all bought the glam and glitter but what we gold was "fools gold".

That is just not accurate. You should go back and read. :coffeepap
 
Doesn't Obamas/Hillary Clintons embrace of Bush/Cheneys pre-emptive war doctrine, categorize them all as NeoCons now?

Obamas foreign Policy is identical to Richard Pearls, Defense Policy Board, yes?

Holy crap this post is so stupid i don't know where to begin.

Don't you think there is something inherently evil about Obamas unending war machine in order to bolster American corporations at the expense of innocent lives?

Now we have multiple regime changes at once by Obama/Hillary - Libya, Syria, while invoking 9/11 like Dubya, and if you think the goal in Iran is any less than over turning the government there, it is a short sighted viewpoint, is it not?


These are Napoleonic wars, American style. France used to send off Napoleon to divide and conquer whenever the Treasury was empty, like the Great Britian of old.

As was the case in Libya, the United States used NATO as a cover to seize Libyan oil, by doing a "Wag the Dog" (DeNiro) type humanitarian scenario, with the help of France and the UK who played a minor role. The same thing is now happening in Syria, a pretext of protecting civillians from "brutual dictatorship" in order to seize oil, much like Iraq.

Of course, what the "liberal" media isn't telling you is that Obama and Hillary armed the rebels in both countries, and caused a majority of the casualties .
 
Good for your guy. But I'll still be voting for the only person running that has a snowballs chance of booting Obama.

Great...and you'll get yourself a guy who will govern just like the guy he is replacing.
 
"Associated Press By STEVE PEOPLES | Associated Press – 13 hrs ago"

"They are trying to be hopeful, but the Democratic Party's most passionate voters are struggling to hide their frustration with President Barack Obama."

Frustrated liberals want more from Obama - Yahoo! News


I think many had Hoped Obama was the lesser of two evils last time, I wonder how that Hope will work this time?

What? They're not happy with Bush II?
 
That is just not accurate. You should go back and read. :coffeepap


IMO, it is true. Senator Obama sold a bill of goods to the voters, and didn't know how to bring home the goods. It just proves he is not POTUS material. He hasn't done what he promised.

I will be voting against him this time around. Fool me once, but never a second time.
 
Great...and you'll get yourself a guy who will govern just like the guy he is replacing.


No, I will at the very least get a man than has proven experience, knowledge, and ability to be POTUS. Nothing is a sure thing, but buying into Obama's all talk and no skills, isn't something I'm willing to live with a second time.


p.s. I realize you have another candidate, and good for you, but he hasn't a snowballs chance of winning. I can't, with a clear mind, vote for someone in that category. :peace
 
Last edited:
IMO, it is true. Senator Obama sold a bill of goods to the voters, and didn't know how to bring home the goods. It just proves he is not POTUS material. He hasn't done what he promised.

I will be voting against him this time around. Fool me once, but never a second time.

:roll: You've never seen any other president run for office. You're younger than I thought. :coffeepap
 
Someone thinks they are far more clever than they really are....Isn't that right Boo...*nudge, *nudge

j-mac

PS, I ain't talkin' 'bout Billy either....

Yeah, he does. It has failed and is trying to excuse it by misrepresenting the conversation. Glad you noticed. :coffeepap
 
:roll: You've never seen any other president run for office. You're younger than I thought. :coffeepap



Did that comment make you feel better? :mrgreen:


I will vote against an inept, inexperienced, unskilled candidate because there is more on the line that partisian politics.

But if you like all those qualities in your candidate, you evidently did it once, so don't stop now.
 
Did that comment make you feel better? :mrgreen:


I will vote against an inept, inexperienced, unskilled candidate because there is more on the line that partisian politics.

But if you like all those qualities in your candidate, you evidently did it once, so don't stop now.

A little bit. ;)

Did you vote against Bush? Texas governors are more figure heads than they are in other states. He was inexperienced to the extreme. I ask because it speaks to whether that really is or is not your position.
 
So far this is this has to be the funniest quote of the election.

"it's like somebody goes to a restaurant, orders a big steak dinner, martini, all that stuff, and then, just as you're sitting down, they leave, and accuse you of running up the tab! That's what they do!"

"I am not making this up!"

It doesn't get much better than that!!
 
Doesn't Obamas/Hillary Clintons embrace of Bush/Cheneys pre-emptive war doctrine, categorize them all as NeoCons now?

Obamas foreign Policy is identical to Richard Pearls, Defense Policy Board, yes?

Holy crap this post is so stupid i don't know where to begin.

Don't you think there is something inherently evil about Obamas unending war machine in order to bolster American corporations at the expense of innocent lives?

Now we have multiple regime changes at once by Obama/Hillary - Libya, Syria, while invoking 9/11 like Dubya, and if you think the goal in Iran is any less than over turning the government there, it is a short sighted viewpoint, is it not?


These are Napoleonic wars, American style. France used to send off Napoleon to divide and conquer whenever the Treasury was empty, like the Great Britian of old.

As was the case in Libya, the United States used NATO as a cover to seize Libyan oil, by doing a "Wag the Dog" (DeNiro) type humanitarian scenario, with the help of France and the UK who played a minor role. The same thing is now happening in Syria, a pretext of protecting civillians from "brutual dictatorship" in order to seize oil, much like Iraq.

Of course, what the "liberal" media isn't telling you is that Obama and Hillary armed the rebels in both countries, and caused a majority of the casualties .

Again, no answer.:roll:

More slander with no specifics, facts, or anything to back it up.

Second time in a row, Ballin75.
 
So far this is this has to be the funniest quote of the election.

"it's like somebody goes to a restaurant, orders a big steak dinner, martini, all that stuff, and then, just as you're sitting down, they leave, and accuse you of running up the tab! That's what they do!"

"I am not making this up!"

It doesn't get much better than that!!
This is the level of intellect/debate preferred by the right. And they want to run the country.
 
Again, no answer.:roll:

More slander with no specifics, facts, or anything to back it up.

Second time in a row, Ballin75.

Funny, I was going to say the exact same thing about your argument.
 
Obama has a weird problem. The left doesn't think he is liberal enough and the right thinks that he is the biggest socialist in history of mankind.

The man can't win.
I certainly believe you are right. He cannot win...or the nation loses.
 
This is the level of intellect/debate preferred by the right. And they want to run the country.


Yes, we should all just make **** up, and mock our opponents like you.


j-mac
 
Texas governors are figureheads? Being governor of the State of Texas means he's inexperienced to the extreme??? What nonsense!

Governorship of George W. Bush - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In some respects it is the Lieutenant Governor of Texas, who presides over the state Senate, who is a more powerful political figure able to exercise greater personal prerogatives.[1][2]. Current Governor Rick Perry served as Lieutenant Governor from 1999-2000, under George W. Bush.

Governor of Texas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The main source of the relative weakness of the Texas Governor can be found in the historical conditions surrounding the Texas Constitution of 1876.

Texas Politics - The Executive Branch
 
In some respects it is the Lieutenant Governor of Texas, who presides over the state Senate, who is a more powerful political figure able to exercise greater personal prerogatives.[1][2]. Current Governor Rick Perry served as Lieutenant Governor from 1999-2000, under George W. Bush.

Governor of Texas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The main source of the relative weakness of the Texas Governor can be found in the historical conditions surrounding the Texas Constitution of 1876.

Texas Politics - The Executive Branch

"In some respects"?

That's a lot different from your earlier claims. In fact Bush was a very popular governor and if you look at the link I provided you can read and learn of his leadership and what he brought to the State.
 
Back
Top Bottom