Obamaites, what do you think?

Lue C Fur

Evil member
Obama does tend toward idealism. That should always be mixed with a healthy amount of realism. He's not near as extreme as some. He's a good guy, really. I can see where some of you think Bush is too. IMO President Obama wonders why he is so disliked, even hated enough to be called the Antichrist, unamerican, etc. His intentions are good. He needs help and he's been asking for it from us since the beginning. When he asked Clinton he got made fun of. WTF?

You dont remember when the left was calling Bush the same thing or worse? Was it OK then?
 

hubrat

Squeaky Wheel
You dont remember when the left was calling Bush the same thing or worse? Was it OK then?

No I don't and no it certainly wasn't ok.

It is what it is, as it was back then, and we have to make due and hopefully a little helpful too.

I said a lot in that little paragraph and that's what you heard the loudest?
 

wkmac

Well-Known Member
"Now, there's one thing you might have noticed I don't complain about: politicians. Everybody complains about politicians. Everybody says they suck. Well, where do people think these politicians come from? They don't fall out of the sky. They don't pass through a membrane from another reality. They come from American parents and American families, American homes, American schools, American churches, American businesses and American universities, and they are elected by American citizens. This is the best we can do folks. This is what we have to offer. It's what our system produces: Garbage in, garbage out. If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're going to get selfish, ignorant leaders. Term limits ain't going to do any good; you're just going to end up with a brand new bunch of selfish, ignorant Americans. So, maybe, maybe, maybe, it's not the politicians who suck. Maybe something else sucks around here... like, the public. Yeah, the public sucks. There's a nice campaign slogan for somebody: 'The Public Sucks. :censored2: Hope.'" George Carlin (R.I.P.)

Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.
H. L. Mencken
 
Obama does tend toward idealism. That should always be mixed with a healthy amount of realism. He's not near as extreme as some. He's a good guy, really. I can see where some of you think Bush is too. [-]IMO President Obama wonders why he is so disliked, even hated enough to be called the Antichrist, unamerican, etc. His intentions are good. [/-]He needs help and he's been asking for it from us since the beginning. When he asked Clinton he got made fun of. WTF?
IMO, just about every president we have had, for generations, were good people at heart and leaned toward some sort of idealism. The problem is, whichever direction that idealism leans, there are folks that do not agree with that ideal. Just as 0bama felt the "health care" bill was the right thing to do, GWB thought getting Saddam Hussein out of control was the right thing to do. Both men got their wishes granted and ,frankly, I don't see the USA and our citizens being that much better off for the efforts. Both men needed help to accomplish their own perspective goals.
As far as being disliked or even hated and called horrible names, most presidents through out history have suffered the same in varying degrees. That kind of goes with the job.
 
Apologies but I have been unable to find this subject in mainstream media.
Disclaimer: Hubrat, not picking on you, just quoted you because your statement was the easiest to find.

We all seem to use "Mainstream media" a lot, but IMO we are incorrectly using the term. FoxNews, with their viewer ratings is as mainstream as all the other major networks. The problem is, they all have an agenda and present tier version of the "truth, justice and the American way", even the not so mainstream online "news" outlets, watchdogs, truth claiming wannabes have agendas. IMHO, none of them should be held up as final authority. All the networks seem to throw in an "agenda opposing" guest, show or news piece to show they are being "fair and balanced" when that is actually the further thing from their thoughts. It seems so simple, yet so complicated.
Of course I would not expect to see a piece on MSNBC or CNN about Dayton's changing of test requirements anymore than I would expect to hear the head guy at the NAACP to say they endorsed lowering acceptable test grades, would you? I mean really...would you?
 

wkmac

Well-Known Member
Speaking of the Dayton Police deal, I'm wondering if the local folks from the Police to the local NAACP are getting a bad rap here and the real heels are at the National level? Why is so little blame being cast into the National level direction? Didn't watch but the first minute or so of the O'Reilly/Kelley interview but hats off to Bill for seeming to lay square blame at the national level rather than the local folks.

Here's a local Dayton News Story on the subject and it's clear IMO this is not anthing to do with creating a race bias in disfavor towards African Americans. It's way past time that local governance returns to local people and tell the federal gov't to "friend" off!

BTW: Dayton can't find qualified personal but is Holder's angle and the national political angle by dropping test scores more about filling jobs for the purpose of making the unemployment picture look better? Wasn't Ohio a key state in the last Presidential election and we got another next year?
:surprised:

They'd never do that now would they? Risk overall public safety and trust just for their own political wellbeing? Say is ain't so!
 

Lue C Fur

Evil member
No I don't and no it certainly wasn't ok.
If you did not hear it back then i would guess you were not listening or eyes were shut? Maybe you hear or see things better when its against someone you support? If you do a search on youtube and images you will see and hear plenty on Bush as the antichrist, devil, hanging, hitler, etc, and much was on the left leaning channels with not much said about it that it was wrong.

It is what it is, as it was back then, and we have to make due and hopefully a little helpful too.

I said a lot in that little paragraph and that's what you heard the loudest?
It was very loud.:wink2:
 

hubrat

Squeaky Wheel
Disclaimer: Hubrat, not picking on you, just quoted you because your statement was the easiest to find.

We all seem to use "Mainstream media" a lot, but IMO we are incorrectly using the term. FoxNews, with their viewer ratings is as mainstream as all the other major networks. The problem is, they all have an agenda and present tier version of the "truth, justice and the American way", even the not so mainstream online "news" outlets, watchdogs, truth claiming wannabes have agendas. IMHO, none of them should be held up as final authority. All the networks seem to throw in an "agenda opposing" guest, show or news piece to show they are being "fair and balanced" when that is actually the further thing from their thoughts. It seems so simple, yet so complicated.
Of course I would not expect to see a piece on MSNBC or CNN about Dayton's changing of test requirements anymore than I would expect to hear the head guy at the NAACP to say they endorsed lowering acceptable test grades, would you? I mean really...would you?

I do not believe that the president of the NAACP would endorse lowering standards because that is extremely insulting to black people. I don't know what's going on in Dayton that folks can't pass the test. Maybe the educators need a union intervention? Tests can be and have historically been culturally biased. I would quite frankly like to see the darn thing. Whose to say Dayton isn't trying to keep their force rather pale. I wouldn't put it past some people

I used the term mainstream in reference to large, familiar agencies. When I googled "Dayton police NAACP" these are the links I got:

exposethemedia
slapblog
scottystarnes
yappi
pajamasmedia
theblaze
johnrlott.blogspot
grendelreport.posterous

And no, I did not know Fox or MSNBC would have no mention of it. I did search both, believe it or not. We're lucky to get a half truth out of any of the LARGER news sources. I am as sick of MSNBC drama as I am anyone else. Just tell me what happened or find someone who can, and shut the hell up so I can make my own gd decision about what I believe.
 

hubrat

Squeaky Wheel
If you did not hear it back then i would guess you were not listening or eyes were shut? Maybe you hear or see things better when its against someone you support? If you do a search on youtube and images you will see and hear plenty on Bush as the antichrist, devil, hanging, hitler, etc, and much was on the left leaning channels with not much said about it that it was wrong.

Well I won't be holding a grudge about it 10 years later!
:happy2:
Maybe Turnabout's fair play, but I ain't on the freakin playground.
 

moreluck

golden ticket member
I love Megan Kelly.....she'll be leaving very soon on Maternity leave. She's one lady that can set O'reilly straight on the legal stuff.
 
OMG that woman is so annoying.

A consultant should really be brought in to review the test.
IMO, nearly ALL news interviewers are pretty annoying, they ALL interrupt the person being interviewed. All in all she agreed with the gentleman she was talking to. @ approx. 1:37 she said they should throw out the test.(to me that inferred formulate another test) She was also correct that reassessing the test is not what the DOJ said, they just said to lower the passing grade (from all that I have been able to find). I wasn't too fond of the way she formed the question of the DOJ having a " paternalistic attitude".
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member

I think this author simply does not understand Civil Rights legislation even at the simplest level. It is fine for the DOJ to prosecute in cases where the codified law allows, but not where it simply doesn't exist. Fat white kids aren't protected under CRL. Maybe Rush can get Boehner to get CRL adjusted or a comprehensiv anti-bullying law for the DOJ to enforce.
 
Top