Are YOU happy with Obama?
Comments
-
I thought you never used the word "hate"...I see you only use forms of the word "hate"...
hip hip hypocrite...
I knew you were going to come back with that when I wrote. I guess I should have said I HARDLY ever use the word.....because yes....I HATE SADAM. So now i'm a hypocrite??? UUUUUGGGHHHH, The Insanity can drive me crazy sometimes...I hate it! Saying I hate somebody pretty much means if they were dying I wouldn't give a shit....there are very few people on the planet that I hate, Obama is not one of them.0 -
...mb262200 wrote:I gueess i'm the one on the stand here taking all the questions and not asking any, and if I don't answer these questions with enough Bush bashing then I have failed. Where did I skirt the subject...I don't see it. I think it just looks like I skirted the subject(to you)because I didn't bash Bush enough to your liking even though I gave you a very open an honest answer. I don't believe Obama threw water on the fire but fuel. Some people choose to see that and some people don't.
Krauthammer defined Bush Derangement Syndrome as "the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency — nay — the very existence of George W. Bush".[1][2] While Krauthammer's column was somewhat tongue-in-cheek (eg., "What is worrying epidemiologists about the Dean incident, however, is that heretofore no case had been reported in Vermont, or any other dairy state"), the term indicates a belief that some extreme criticisms of President Bush are of emotional origins rather than based on facts or logic. The term has occasionally been adopted by other writers in the political arena.[3][4][5]
You are being asked to clarify a previously made statement that resulted in confusing, mixed messages.
You ARE skirting the main subject by continually trying to make this a Bush vs. Obama thing. No one is asking you to 'Bash Bush'. We just would like you to clarify the logic you employ that lets former President Bush off the hook, regarding the decisions he made between 2001 and 2008 that have lead to the current situations we face in 2009 and beyond. You don't need to step up to your martyr pedestal, donning your persecuted hat. We are just trying to figure out how you reconcile these opposing messages you spew.
And whether or not you believe President Obama is throwing water or gasoline onto the fire.... you completely fail to acknowledge that former President Bush started the fire. I am saving my judgement on the water or gasoline thing until i have gotten clearer, more defined data.
...
As for your 'Bush Derangement Syndrome' catch phrase... the greatest flaw I see in it is the blatant misperception that people hate Bush... just because. No... we hated the DECISIONS and ACTION made by the Bush Administration that have lead our nation to the prediciment we see today. If it were President Al Gore... we would be saying the same things.... and you would be defending Al Gore by telling us we have 'Gore Derangement Syndrome'... right?Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!0 -
...Cosmo wrote:mb262200 wrote:I gueess i'm the one on the stand here taking all the questions and not asking any, and if I don't answer these questions with enough Bush bashing then I have failed. Where did I skirt the subject...I don't see it. I think it just looks like I skirted the subject(to you)because I didn't bash Bush enough to your liking even though I gave you a very open an honest answer. I don't believe Obama threw water on the fire but fuel. Some people choose to see that and some people don't.
Krauthammer defined Bush Derangement Syndrome as "the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency — nay — the very existence of George W. Bush".[1][2] While Krauthammer's column was somewhat tongue-in-cheek (eg., "What is worrying epidemiologists about the Dean incident, however, is that heretofore no case had been reported in Vermont, or any other dairy state"), the term indicates a belief that some extreme criticisms of President Bush are of emotional origins rather than based on facts or logic. The term has occasionally been adopted by other writers in the political arena.[3][4][5]
You are being asked to clarify a previously made statement that resulted in confusing, mixed messages.
You ARE skirting the main subject by continually trying to make this a Bush vs. Obama thing. No one is asking you to 'Bash Bush'. We just would like you to clarify the logic you employ that lets former President Bush off the hook, regarding the decisions he made between 2001 and 2008 that have lead to the current situations we face in 2009 and beyond. You don't need to step up to your martyr pedestal, donning your persecuted hat. We are just trying to figure out how you reconcile these opposing messages you spew.
And whether or not you believe President Obama is throwing water or gasoline onto the fire.... you completely fail to acknowledge that former President Bush started the fire. I am saving my judgement on the water or gasoline thing until i have gotten clearer, more defined data.
...
As for your 'Bush Derangement Syndrome' catch phrase... the greatest flaw I see in it is the blatant misperception that people hate Bush... just
The reason why he's disliked by me is his decisions, actions and arrogance which has led to the predicament this country now faces and has to deal with. Nothing more.
Peace*We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)0 -
...g under p wrote:...The reason why he's disliked by me is his decisions, actions and arrogance which has led to the predicament this country now faces and has to deal with. Nothing more.
Peace
Exactly. Why can't Krauthammer (and McCarthy, Malkin, Hannity or MB262200) see this? If it were a President Gore.. or hell, a President Vedder that made the same decisions... undertook the same actions and displayed the same arrogance... we would STILL be saying the same things.
Would the Krauthammer/MB262200 crowd have come up with the same defense of those decisions, actions and arrogance? Probably.Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!0 -
NO!!!!!!!!!
LET'S BE FAIR...
There are and were pleanty of democrats that were right there with Bush and let's not forget who has had control of the house ansd senate for the last 4 yrs.0 -
...prfctlefts wrote:NO!!!!!!!!!
LET'S BE FAIR...
There are and were pleanty of democrats that were right there with Bush and let's not forget who has had control of the house ansd senate for the last 4 yrs.
I agree. But this is NOT a Democrats vs. Republican thing... it is placing responsibility and accountability for the decisions.
...
And as a side note... which doesn't really matter in this discussion... but, who held the House and senate from 1994 to 2006? Here's a hint... they made a 'Contract With America' and promised us that they'd clean house.Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!0 -
g under p wrote:
...Cosmo wrote:mb262200 wrote:I gueess i'm the one on the stand here taking all the questions and not asking any, and if I don't answer these questions with enough Bush bashing then I have failed. Where did I skirt the subject...I don't see it. I think it just looks like I skirted the subject(to you)because I didn't bash Bush enough to your liking even though I gave you a very open an honest answer. I don't believe Obama threw water on the fire but fuel. Some people choose to see that and some people don't.
Krauthammer defined Bush Derangement Syndrome as "the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency — nay — the very existence of George W. Bush".[1][2] While Krauthammer's column was somewhat tongue-in-cheek (eg., "What is worrying epidemiologists about the Dean incident, however, is that heretofore no case had been reported in Vermont, or any other dairy state"), the term indicates a belief that some extreme criticisms of President Bush are of emotional origins rather than based on facts or logic. The term has occasionally been adopted by other writers in the political arena.[3][4][5]
You are being asked to clarify a previously made statement that resulted in confusing, mixed messages.
You ARE skirting the main subject by continually trying to make this a Bush vs. Obama thing. No one is asking you to 'Bash Bush'. We just would like you to clarify the logic you employ that lets former President Bush off the hook, regarding the decisions he made between 2001 and 2008 that have lead to the current situations we face in 2009 and beyond. You don't need to step up to your martyr pedestal, donning your persecuted hat. We are just trying to figure out how you reconcile these opposing messages you spew.
And whether or not you believe President Obama is throwing water or gasoline onto the fire.... you completely fail to acknowledge that former President Bush started the fire. I am saving my judgement on the water or gasoline thing until i have gotten clearer, more defined data.
...
As for your 'Bush Derangement Syndrome' catch phrase... the greatest flaw I see in it is the blatant misperception that people hate Bush... just
The reason why he's disliked by me is his decisions, actions and arrogance which has led to the predicament this country now faces and has to deal with. Nothing more.
Peace
You asked a question and I anwered them, wither you accept or acknowledge the answers are completely up to you. But please stop accusing me of skirting the issues, I clearly answered what you asked.0 -
You don't need to step up to your martyr pedestal, donning your persecuted hat.
You are very confusing....I don't see anywhere where I could be accused of acting like this in our discusion.0 -
mb262200 wrote:Clinton Derangement Syndrome [is] "the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency — nay — the very existence of Bill Clinton".[1][2] ....the term indicates a belief that some extreme criticisms of President Clinton are of emotional origins rather than based on facts or logic. The term has occasionally been adopted by other writers in the political arena.[3][4][5]
Fixed.
Seriously, I found the whole "Bush Derangement Syndrome" a classic example of Republican projection - they find fault in others what they do themselves.
Didn't we hear chorus after chorus of "Clinton did it too!" for years?
"It's not hard to own something. Or everything. You just have to know that it's yours, and then be willing to let it go." - Neil Gaiman, "Stardust"0 -
Cosmo wrote:
...g under p wrote:...The reason why he's disliked by me is his decisions, actions and arrogance which has led to the predicament this country now faces and has to deal with. Nothing more.
Peace
Exactly. Why can't Krauthammer (and McCarthy, Malkin, Hannity or MB262200) see this? If it were a President Gore.. or hell, a President Vedder that made the same decisions... undertook the same actions and displayed the same arrogance... we would STILL be saying the same things.
Would the Krauthammer/MB262200 crowd have come up with the same defense of those decisions, actions and arrogance? Probably.
Where have I gave any notion that I can not see this? I have made it very clear that I believe Bush is responsible for some things.0 -
Starfall wrote:mb262200 wrote:Clinton Derangement Syndrome [is] "the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency — nay — the very existence of Bill Clinton".[1][2] ....the term indicates a belief that some extreme criticisms of President Clinton are of emotional origins rather than based on facts or logic. The term has occasionally been adopted by other writers in the political arena.[3][4][5]
Fixed.
Seriously, I found the whole "Bush Derangement Syndrome" a classic example of Republican projection - they find fault in others what they do themselves.
Didn't we hear chorus after chorus of "Clinton did it too!" for years?
I don't recall Bush stepping up to the podium time after time clarifying that he is trying to clean up someone elses mess. Seems childish and immature to me for an American Leader.0 -
...mb262200 wrote:You asked a question and I anwered them, wither you accept or acknowledge the answers are completely up to you. But please stop accusing me of skirting the issues, I clearly answered what you asked.
So, here's what you are saying... you DO believe a person should be held responsible for consequences of the decisions they make and the actions they take.
But... you don't think former President Bush should be held responsible for any of the consequences that exists today, that are a direct result of his past decisions and actions.
How is this NOT contradictary? Do you see the confusion in this line of thought?
...
And how are you skirting it? By continually trying to bring President Obama into this equation.
The question is... how can you claim support of personal responsibility... and let President Bush have a 'Get Out Of Responsibility, Free' card?
If you have already answered this... please... direct me to it, because i can't find it.Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!0 -
...mb262200 wrote:Where have I gave any notion that I can not see this? I have made it very clear that I believe Bush is responsible for some things.
So.. this is an admission that you also suffer from 'Bush Derangement Syndrome'... right?Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!0 -
mb262200 wrote:I don't recall Bush stepping up to the podium time after time clarifying that he is trying to clean up someone elses mess. Seems childish and immature to me for an American Leader.
What was there to clean up? He entered office with a $700 million projected budget surplus, a booming economy (one perfectly tailored to his corporatist allies), a peace accord completed in Ireland and one looming in the Middle East, and an overall time of prosperity. Barack Obama inherited the opposite, a complete disaster.
Unless, of course, you're referring to a certain stained blue dress that the Republicans spent millions of taxpayer dollars on to impeach the Clenis. "It's not hard to own something. Or everything. You just have to know that it's yours, and then be willing to let it go." - Neil Gaiman, "Stardust"0 -
...mb262200 wrote:You don't need to step up to your martyr pedestal, donning your persecuted hat.
You are very confusing....I don't see anywhere where I could be accused of acting like this in our discusion.
Here you go...
...mb262200 wrote:I gueess i'm the one on the stand here taking all the questions and not asking any, and if I don't answer these questions with enough Bush bashing then I have failed. Where did I skirt the subject...I don't see it. I think it just looks like I skirted the subject(to you)because I didn't bash Bush enough to your liking even though I gave you a very open an honest answer. I don't believe Obama threw water on the fire but fuel. Some people choose to see that and some people don't..
Poor, poor persecuted you... having to answer all of these questions from some sort of stand... like you are being held in court. No one is judging you... we just want you to clarify your statements... that's all.Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!0 -
Cosmo wrote:
...mb262200 wrote:You asked a question and I anwered them, wither you accept or acknowledge the answers are completely up to you. But please stop accusing me of skirting the issues, I clearly answered what you asked.
So, here's what you are saying... you DO believe a person should be held responsible for consequences of the decisions they make and the actions they take.
But... you don't think former President Bush should be held responsible for any of the consequences that exists today, that are a direct result of his past decisions and actions.
How is this NOT contradictary? Do you see the confusion in this line of thought?
...
And how are you skirting it? By continually trying to bring President Obama into this equation.
The question is... how can you claim support of personal responsibility... and let President Bush have a 'Get Out Of Responsibility, Free' card?
If you have already answered this... please... direct me to it, because i can't find it.
You want to hold him responsible the go ahead and hold him responsible if it makes you feel better....sure as hell ain't going to fix anything though. So while Obama keeps spending billions of dollars that do nothing we'll just keep blaming Bush...who is giving who the free pass...the pendilum swings both ways. Seems like you're just trying to get me to sit here and say how bad Bush was. Certain things I liked about Bush and certain things I didn't like.....sorry to upset you.0 -
Cosmo wrote:
...mb262200 wrote:You don't need to step up to your martyr pedestal, donning your persecuted hat.
You are very confusing....I don't see anywhere where I could be accused of acting like this in our discusion.
Here you go...
...mb262200 wrote:I gueess i'm the one on the stand here taking all the questions and not asking any, and if I don't answer these questions with enough Bush bashing then I have failed. Where did I skirt the subject...I don't see it. I think it just looks like I skirted the subject(to you)because I didn't bash Bush enough to your liking even though I gave you a very open an honest answer. I don't believe Obama threw water on the fire but fuel. Some people choose to see that and some people don't..
Poor, poor persecuted you... having to answer all of these questions from some sort of stand... like you are being held in court. No one is judging you... we just want you to clarify your statements... that's all.
WHERE HAVE I NOT ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION?0 -
...mb262200 wrote:You want to hold him responsible the go ahead and hold him responsible if it makes you feel better....sure as hell ain't going to fix anything though. So while Obama keeps spending billions of dollars that do nothing we'll just keep blaming Bush...who is giving who the free pass...the pendilum swings both ways. Seems like you're just trying to get me to sit here and say how bad Bush was. Certain things I liked about Bush and certain things I didn't like.....sorry to upset you.
There it is... again! Dragging President obama into the Bush equation.... it does not equate.
Using this logic:
"You want to hold him responsible the go ahead and hold him responsible if it makes you feel better....sure as hell ain't going to fix anything though."
If I went into your house and took a big shit in the middle of the floor... and your wife accidentially stepped in it and complained about shit on her foot... you would say, "That shit ain't going back where it came from... deal with it, Bitch". And i would be free of all responsibility.
Cool.
...
And, just for the record... I never said I'm giving President Obama a free pass. I have said that I will hold him responsible for his actions and the consequences he paases on t the next President.Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!0 -
Cosmo wrote:
...mb262200 wrote:You want to hold him responsible the go ahead and hold him responsible if it makes you feel better....sure as hell ain't going to fix anything though. So while Obama keeps spending billions of dollars that do nothing we'll just keep blaming Bush...who is giving who the free pass...the pendilum swings both ways. Seems like you're just trying to get me to sit here and say how bad Bush was. Certain things I liked about Bush and certain things I didn't like.....sorry to upset you.
There it is... again! Dragging President obama into the Bush equation.... it does not equate.
Using this logic:
"You want to hold him responsible the go ahead and hold him responsible if it makes you feel better....sure as hell ain't going to fix anything though."
If I went into your house and took a big shit in the middle of the floor... and your wife accidentially stepped in it and complained about shit on her foot... you would say, "That shit ain't going back where it came from... deal with it, Bitch". And i would be free of all responsibility.
Cool.
...
And, just for the record... I never said I'm giving President Obama a free pass. I have said that I will hold him responsible for his actions and the consequences he paases on t the next President.
Well first of all, you hold Bush responsible for not"intervening", so in your world I would hold my wife responsible for not stopping you.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.9K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.1K The Porch
- 275 Vitalogy
- 35.1K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.2K Flea Market
- 39.2K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help