Those "rich" people you keep referring to had to have taken some risk to earn their place. Why do we continue to demonize those who have worked hard and earned their fortunes? Not everyone is Bernie Madoff.
Demonizing every successful person comes off a little too Bolshevik.
who risks more, bill gates, or the man who is working in a mine for $30,000 a year? how about the professional athlete, or the marine stationed in afghanistan? who risks more? what about the CEO, who risks more, the CEO, or the cop who is paid peanuts to work security for him?
i am not demonizing anyone. we all know that the "rich create the jobs" line is a lie.
are you telling me that paris hilton worked for her fortune and she deserves a tax break? how about he kardashians?
you have your opinion, i have mine.
You do raise some decent points, but from where I stand, setting these kinds of precedents are dangerous: "This guy has too much. We need to TAKE from him and give to this guy." Thomas Jefferson said the republic will die when you take from those willing to work and give to those who are not.
Redistribution of wealth is code word for state takeover. Communists mask their hideous intentions behind the friendly mask of social justice.
this is not redistribution of wealth. please explain to me how this is redistribution of wealth. it is not like the increased tax on the rich would be stolen from them and given directly to the poor. what is it with all of the buzzwords on the forum today?
and you did not answer my question about why to you support the top 2% of earners? and how can you be for reducing the deficit, yet taking money away from the government in the form of cutting taxes for that richest 2%? again , you can not be for reducing the deficit AND tax cuts for the wealthy. it is mathematically impossible...the assertion that you can do both is borderline absurd.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
and you did not answer my question about why to you support the top 2% of earners? and how can you be for reducing the deficit, yet taking money away from the government in the form of cutting taxes for that richest 2%. again , you can not be for reducing the deficit AND tax cuts for the wealthy. it is mathematically impossible...
Because you cannot tax people to death and expect them to create wealth or jobs. You cannot stifle entrepreneuralism and expect fruitful results. This is why socialism sucks and people come here from around the world to start businesses.
Where's your proof that the deficit is going to be cut by taxing anyone?
and you did not answer my question about why to you support the top 2% of earners? and how can you be for reducing the deficit, yet taking money away from the government in the form of cutting taxes for that richest 2%. again , you can not be for reducing the deficit AND tax cuts for the wealthy. it is mathematically impossible...
Because you cannot tax people to death and expect them to create wealth or jobs. You cannot stifle entrepreneuralism and expect fruitful results. This is why socialism sucks and people come here from around the world to start businesses.
Where's your proof that the deficit is going to be cut by taxing anyone?
raising taxes on the rich is not "taxing them to death". another buzzword meant to stir up negative emotions...
and how is the tax "burden" going to stifle entrepreneuralism? the taxes will be about what they were under clinton, which is very resonable.
and where are you getting this as socialism? another buzzword that has been proven false. obama is not a socialist. any true socialist will tell you that. and our ecominic issues are definitely not socialist.
and my proof is in all of those other threads with news articles that state that these tax cuts are adding about $900 billion to the deficit....
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
It wasn't rhetorical. There was a point to be made, and it applies to your job question: The tax cuts were passed in '01 and '03. A small tax cut cannot save an economy that is hindered by an administration that has spent more money in 2 years than the entire US spent from 1789-1980.
The question regarding why a gov't taxes, strikes at the heart of our constitutional rights against overreaching gov't.
If they didn't spend our money faster than crackheads, we wouldn't be sitting here acting like this is there money, and we're lucky if they let us keep any of it. Think about it. They've already spent the money they're debating letting the "rich" people keep. Nancy Pelosi had a $50,000/year alchohol bill as Speaker- and that was just on her free "Air Force Airliner." 50K/year on airplne booze!!!! And then tells you she's for the little guy and you believe her....
Gov't FOR the people.
NOT people for the gov't.
This is the fundamental phiosphical difference b/w Liberalism and Conservatism.
um, the tax cuts for the "job makers" were in place for 10 years...um, no jobs...
and I love the Pelosi thing, let explore that....Pelosi has a big booze bill = billionaires need more money...
you got me there...
NO: WE have a big booze bill. See, it's all good w/ a Lib, as long as it's not your money...
Dude, its ALL OUR MONEY...
it is not just those in congress that are angry and abandoning him. latest polls released today have some troubling news for obama. his disaproval rating among democrats has nearly doubled. it would be alright to lose some democrats if he was picking up independent support, but hs is not....
so not even 2 years into his Presidency and the obama faithful are throwing him away.
that tells me that they are a whole lot smarter than the bush faithful who put up with his crap for 8 years.
i think obama genuinely has a good heart. unfortunately good hearts don't make a great President on it's own. you have got to be able to make the tough calls too and i've yet to see him be able to do that.
i'd also like to take a moment to say that i think the way he has been demonized by some of the American public (obama is a muslim OMG, he's not a citizen, he is the anti-christ, where is his birth certificate etc) just shows how hateful, ignorant, racist and plain dumb some Americans are.
those of you who are guilty of that behaviour ought to be ashamed of yourselves.
so not even 2 years into his Presidency and the obama faithful are throwing him away.
that tells me that they are a whole lot smarter than the bush faithful who put up with his crap for 8 years.
i think obama genuinely has a good heart. unfortunately good hearts don't make a great President on it's own. you have got to be able to make the tough calls too and i've yet to see him be able to do that.
i'd also like to take a moment to say that i think the way he has been demonized by some of the American public (obama is a muslim OMG, he's not a citizen, he is the anti-christ, where is his birth certificate etc) just shows how hateful, ignorant, racist and plain dumb some Americans are.
those of you who are guilty of that behaviour ought to be ashamed of yourselves.
I'm not ashamed to criticize the man for his policies. I couldn't care less what the color of his skin is. It means nothing to me.
so not even 2 years into his Presidency and the obama faithful are throwing him away.
that tells me that they are a whole lot smarter than the bush faithful who put up with his crap for 8 years.
i think obama genuinely has a good heart. unfortunately good hearts don't make a great President on it's own. you have got to be able to make the tough calls too and i've yet to see him be able to do that.
i'd also like to take a moment to say that i think the way he has been demonized by some of the American public (obama is a muslim OMG, he's not a citizen, he is the anti-christ, where is his birth certificate etc) just shows how hateful, ignorant, racist and plain dumb some Americans are.
those of you who are guilty of that behaviour ought to be ashamed of yourselves.
skin color means nothing but what you just posted has been going on for years with every president,brown black or yellow people have said the same things about every president but now with a black president all the sudden it's a huge issue,unfortunately it's been this way for years and no mater who is president or what color they are this will continue to happen,not that it's right by any means but pointing the finger of racism at anybody is one reason racism is alive and well in America,people of all colors are guilty of it but white people seem to get most or all the attention for this.
Interestin read. Bush the man had many faults, as did many of his policies. I think this article shows the poicies that history are likely to deem succussful- that is the policies that have endured, and been reaffirmed by a Democrat-controlled administration and Congress, are rooted in Conservatism.
History will be kinder than to W than it will be to Obama. Wait and see....
History will be kinder than to W than it will be to Obama. Wait and see....
i doubt it, but if so it is only because bush had a favorable congress and senate that gave him everything he wanted. not the case with obama and the party of no....
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
History will be kinder than to W than it will be to Obama. Wait and see....
i doubt it, but if so it is only because bush had a favorable congress and senate that gave him everything he wanted. not the case with obama and the party of no....
Wait- Obama DIDN"T have a "favorable Congress" that shoved things like Obamacare down our throats despite being oppsed by 65% of Americans (reference the historic ass-kicking last November)? These Congressmen lost their jobs, some lost their careers; Some that had been in Congress for 40 years!! They all ran right off a cliff for this President!! The party of no? What happened to "Yes We Can"? Well, they DID. And the American public showed them the proverbial door last November- a direct REPUDIATION of Obama's policies. Policies APPROVED by what you infer was an unfavorable Congress. The facts just don't support that.
Okay, I'll play crazy. Just what would your idea of a "favorable" Congress for Obama be- since 70% of the House and 60% of the Senate is not enough?
History will be kinder than to W than it will be to Obama. Wait and see....
i doubt it, but if so it is only because bush had a favorable congress and senate that gave him everything he wanted. not the case with obama and the party of no....
I believe the democrat's struggles lie more within their leadership then the "party of no". Their biggest strategic downfall was their initial focus on world and social issues and not realizing that the economy was crumbling. I don't think they realized that the American public's number one priority is having a job and money. When we have job security, it is something we take for granted and allows us to focus on other important issues, but when that security is gone, not much really matters. The Republicans saw this and ran with it with a full head of steam. The Democrats broke rank and now the whole base is fractured.
If the Democrats want to recover, they need new leadership (possibly a group that can work together on an overall strategy instead of having hidden agendas).
History will be kinder than to W than it will be to Obama. Wait and see....
i doubt it, but if so it is only because bush had a favorable congress and senate that gave him everything he wanted. not the case with obama and the party of no....
I don't think that this is correct. Obama did have control of the senate and house for his first 2 years in office. now i agree that if you give a tax cut to 1 group you must give it to everyone (that's only fair) This was a smart move on Obama behalf but imho Obama has not sold it right. that seems to be the problem with the current administration. Obama campaign was so well done in terms of communication but now they can't do anything.
History will be kinder than to W than it will be to Obama. Wait and see....
i doubt it, but if so it is only because bush had a favorable congress and senate that gave him everything he wanted. not the case with obama and the party of no....
I don't think that this is correct. Obama did have control of the senate and house for his first 2 years in office. now i agree that if you give a tax cut to 1 group you must give it to everyone (that's only fair) This was a smart move on Obama behalf but imho Obama has not sold it right. that seems to be the problem with the current administration. Obama campaign was so well done in terms of communication but now they can't do anything.
But that same argument was made by admin officials, and even Obama himself. (see his 60 minutes interview and also Gibbs saying "We haven't had a policy discussion in 20 months").
To them, it's not that the American public understands and repudiates Obama's policies, it's that Obama didn't explain it clearly enough to us little minded people. He's SO smart, we're SO dumb. Arrogance unparalleled.
Sorry friend, I think it IS the policy, not the communication. But I agree that saying, "We have to pass this bill so you can see what's in it"- Pelosi, is not the best example of good communication.
Huckabee: Obama self-destructed at tax deal press conference
By: CNN Political Producer Peter Hamby
Washington (CNN) - In the eyes of former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, President Obama's press conference last week to address his deal with Republicans on taxes and unemployment benefits was "amateurish."
"The most bizarre part of the whole process was watching President Obama self-destruct at the podium yesterday," Huckabee told the National Journal in an interview published Monday, when asked about the tax deal.
"I was just stunned - I really couldn't believe that a man that was elected president was as amateurish as he was, and essentially launched from the podium at some of his own, taking aim and mowing down everybody in D.C. and walking away having not understood that he just lost a lot of people," he said.
Huckabee called the deal "the best anyone can hope for at this point" but said he had hoped that tax rates would be extended longer than just two years.
He also questioned why the president would kick the can down the road two years, assuring that the tax debate will be renewed in the middle of his re-election campaign.
"Politically, I was shocked it was going to be two not three, because it puts this whole thing in the very center, the bull's-eye of the 2012 presidential election," said Huckabee, who is considering a repeat presidential run.
Obama said during the press conference that he welcomes a campaign fight in 2012 over the GOP's economic vision, specifically their demand to extend tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans.
i doubt it, but if so it is only because bush had a favorable congress and senate that gave him everything he wanted. not the case with obama and the party of no....[/quote]
I don't think that this is correct. Obama did have control of the senate and house for his first 2 years in office. now i agree that if you give a tax cut to 1 group you must give it to everyone (that's only fair) This was a smart move on Obama behalf but imho Obama has not sold it right. that seems to be the problem with the current administration. Obama campaign was so well done in terms of communication but now they can't do anything.[/quote]
But that same argument was made by admin officials, and even Obama himself. (see his 60 minutes interview and also Gibbs saying "We haven't had a policy discussion in 20 months").
To them, it's not that the American public understands and repudiates Obama's policies, it's that Obama didn't explain it clearly enough to us little minded people. He's SO smart, we're SO dumb. Arrogance unparalleled.
Sorry friend, I think it IS the policy, not the communication. But I agree that saying, "We have to pass this bill so you can see what's in it"- Pelosi, is not the best example of good communication.[/quote]
sorry i bit confused, what are you talking about? I am not saying that Obama policies are all good but i do believe that more people would agree with some of his policies if he explained them better.
so not even 2 years into his Presidency and the obama faithful are throwing him away.
that tells me that they are a whole lot smarter than the bush faithful who put up with his crap for 8 years.
i think obama genuinely has a good heart. unfortunately good hearts don't make a great President on it's own. you have got to be able to make the tough calls too and i've yet to see him be able to do that.
i'd also like to take a moment to say that i think the way he has been demonized by some of the American public (obama is a muslim OMG, he's not a citizen, he is the anti-christ, where is his birth certificate etc) just shows how hateful, ignorant, racist and plain dumb some Americans are.
those of you who are guilty of that behaviour ought to be ashamed of yourselves.
I'm not ashamed to criticize the man for his policies. I couldn't care less what the color of his skin is. It means nothing to me.
i don't believe i said anyone should be ashamed or afraid to criticize Obama for his actual Policies.
i said i was referring to the many ignorant people who critcize him for other things. take the rumor that Obama is a Muslim for example . he's not, but what i want to know is WHY whenever this gets raised, the implication is that there is something wrong with being an Arab-American or a Muslim.
Is there something wrong with being a muslim in the US?
so not even 2 years into his Presidency and the obama faithful are throwing him away.
that tells me that they are a whole lot smarter than the bush faithful who put up with his crap for 8 years.
i think obama genuinely has a good heart. unfortunately good hearts don't make a great President on it's own. you have got to be able to make the tough calls too and i've yet to see him be able to do that.
i'd also like to take a moment to say that i think the way he has been demonized by some of the American public (obama is a muslim OMG, he's not a citizen, he is the anti-christ, where is his birth certificate etc) just shows how hateful, ignorant, racist and plain dumb some Americans are.
those of you who are guilty of that behaviour ought to be ashamed of yourselves.
I'm not ashamed to criticize the man for his policies. I couldn't care less what the color of his skin is. It means nothing to me.
i don't believe i said anyone should be ashamed or afraid to criticize Obama for his actual Policies.
i said i was referring to the many ignorant people who critcize him for other things. take the rumor that Obama is a Muslim for example . he's not, but what i want to know is WHY whenever this gets raised, the implication is that there is something wrong with being an Arab-American or a Muslim.
Is there something wrong with being a muslim in the US?
No, Angel. you fuckin said it, now own it. Anytime someone disagrees w/ your boy, they're a racist. It's so old. I guess 58% of America is racist b/c that's how many people disapprove of Obama. http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/world/5085 ... l.html.csp
[
I'm not ashamed to criticize the man for his policies. I couldn't care less what the color of his skin is. It means nothing to me.[/quote]
i don't believe i said anyone should be ashamed or afraid to criticize Obama for his actual Policies.
i said i was referring to the many ignorant people who critcize him for other things. take the rumor that Obama is a Muslim for example . he's not, but what i want to know is WHY whenever this gets raised, the implication is that there is something wrong with being an Arab-American or a Muslim.
Is there something wrong with being a muslim in the US?[/quote]
No, Angel. you fuckin said it, now own it. Anytime someone disagrees w/ your boy, they're a racist. It's so old. I guess 58% of America is racist b/c that's how many people disapprove of Obama. http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/world/5085 ... l.html.csp
It's so old.[/quote]
no where did he say that :roll: what he was talking about is how many people in america still believe things that have been found to be false about Obama. I don't think you can deny that.
The guy could say he's a fucking Druid- I don't care. He's a shitty President, an international joke, an economic and diplomatic moron, and a complete and total disappointment to his voters. His one-term presidency will go down as the worst since Carter, which puts him on the shortlist for Worst Ever.
He could be a green and purple Scientologist from Saturn, and it wouldn't fucking matter.
The guy could say he's a fucking Druid- I don't care. He's a shitty President, an international joke, an economic and diplomatic moron, and a complete and total disappointment to his voters. His one-term presidency will go down as the worst since Carter, which puts him on the shortlist for Worst Ever.
He could be a green and purple Scientologist from Saturn, and it wouldn't fucking matter.
Just so that we can fulfill your goal of having a reasonable discussion. What exactly are your issues with the president? please give me examples if possible. Thank you
No, Angel. you fuckin said it, now own it. Anytime someone disagrees w/ your boy, they're a racist. It's so old. I guess 58% of America is racist b/c that's how many people disapprove of Obama. http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/world/5085 ... l.html.csp
It's so old.
'my boy'. lol. that's hilarious. a few weeks ago i was called anti american and now obama is 'my boy. lol. that's too funny,
i have no problems with people crititicizing Obama for his Policies. i've done it plenty of times.
again, for the last time, what i did say was this.
i think obama genuinely has a good heart. unfortunately good hearts don't make a great President on it's own. you have got to be able to make the tough calls too and i've yet to see him be able to do that.
i'd also like to take a moment to say that i think the way he has been demonized by some of the American public (obama is a muslim OMG, he's not a citizen, he is the anti-christ, where is his birth certificate etc) just shows how hateful, ignorant, racist and plain dumb some Americans are.
those of you who are guilty of that behaviour ought to be ashamed of yourselves.
No, Angel. you fuckin said it, now own it. Anytime someone disagrees w/ your boy, they're a racist. It's so old. I guess 58% of America is racist b/c that's how many people disapprove of Obama. http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/world/5085 ... l.html.csp
It's so old.
'my boy'. lol. that's hilarious. a few weeks ago i was called anti american and now obama is 'my boy. lol. that's too funny,
i have no problems with people crititicizing Obama for his Policies. i've done it plenty of times.
again, for the last time, what i did say was this.
i think obama genuinely has a good heart. unfortunately good hearts don't make a great President on it's own. you have got to be able to make the tough calls too and i've yet to see him be able to do that.
i'd also like to take a moment to say that i think the way he has been demonized by some of the American public (obama is a muslim OMG, he's not a citizen, he is the anti-christ, where is his birth certificate etc) just shows how hateful, ignorant, racist and plain dumb some Americans are.
those of you who are guilty of that behaviour ought to be ashamed of yourselves.
Demonizing every successful person comes off a little too Bolshevik.
How would you describe people who demonize all unemployed people as lazy wastes of space who just want the government to provide for them? If you want nuance when talking about the rich, then you should apply it to the poor too.
And I listen for the voice inside my head... nothing. I'll do this one myself.
Comments
and you did not answer my question about why to you support the top 2% of earners? and how can you be for reducing the deficit, yet taking money away from the government in the form of cutting taxes for that richest 2%? again , you can not be for reducing the deficit AND tax cuts for the wealthy. it is mathematically impossible...the assertion that you can do both is borderline absurd.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Because you cannot tax people to death and expect them to create wealth or jobs. You cannot stifle entrepreneuralism and expect fruitful results. This is why socialism sucks and people come here from around the world to start businesses.
Where's your proof that the deficit is going to be cut by taxing anyone?
and how is the tax "burden" going to stifle entrepreneuralism? the taxes will be about what they were under clinton, which is very resonable.
and where are you getting this as socialism? another buzzword that has been proven false. obama is not a socialist. any true socialist will tell you that. and our ecominic issues are definitely not socialist.
and my proof is in all of those other threads with news articles that state that these tax cuts are adding about $900 billion to the deficit....
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
NO: WE have a big booze bill. See, it's all good w/ a Lib, as long as it's not your money...
Dude, its ALL OUR MONEY...
Here is the author of Obamacare, Senator Max Bauchus to talk about redistribution of wealth. Enjoy!
http://www.politicususa.com/en/obama-di ... -democrats
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
that tells me that they are a whole lot smarter than the bush faithful who put up with his crap for 8 years.
i think obama genuinely has a good heart. unfortunately good hearts don't make a great President on it's own. you have got to be able to make the tough calls too and i've yet to see him be able to do that.
i'd also like to take a moment to say that i think the way he has been demonized by some of the American public (obama is a muslim OMG, he's not a citizen, he is the anti-christ, where is his birth certificate etc) just shows how hateful, ignorant, racist and plain dumb some Americans are.
those of you who are guilty of that behaviour ought to be ashamed of yourselves.
I'm not ashamed to criticize the man for his policies. I couldn't care less what the color of his skin is. It means nothing to me.
skin color means nothing but what you just posted has been going on for years with every president,brown black or yellow people have said the same things about every president but now with a black president all the sudden it's a huge issue,unfortunately it's been this way for years and no mater who is president or what color they are this will continue to happen,not that it's right by any means but pointing the finger of racism at anybody is one reason racism is alive and well in America,people of all colors are guilty of it but white people seem to get most or all the attention for this.
Godfather.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/12/13/z ... tml?hpt=T2
that was cool read thanks !
Godfather.
Interestin read. Bush the man had many faults, as did many of his policies. I think this article shows the poicies that history are likely to deem succussful- that is the policies that have endured, and been reaffirmed by a Democrat-controlled administration and Congress, are rooted in Conservatism.
History will be kinder than to W than it will be to Obama. Wait and see....
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Wait- Obama DIDN"T have a "favorable Congress" that shoved things like Obamacare down our throats despite being oppsed by 65% of Americans (reference the historic ass-kicking last November)? These Congressmen lost their jobs, some lost their careers; Some that had been in Congress for 40 years!! They all ran right off a cliff for this President!! The party of no? What happened to "Yes We Can"? Well, they DID. And the American public showed them the proverbial door last November- a direct REPUDIATION of Obama's policies. Policies APPROVED by what you infer was an unfavorable Congress. The facts just don't support that.
Okay, I'll play crazy. Just what would your idea of a "favorable" Congress for Obama be- since 70% of the House and 60% of the Senate is not enough?
If the Democrats want to recover, they need new leadership (possibly a group that can work together on an overall strategy instead of having hidden agendas).
I don't think that this is correct. Obama did have control of the senate and house for his first 2 years in office. now i agree that if you give a tax cut to 1 group you must give it to everyone (that's only fair) This was a smart move on Obama behalf but imho Obama has not sold it right. that seems to be the problem with the current administration. Obama campaign was so well done in terms of communication but now they can't do anything.
But that same argument was made by admin officials, and even Obama himself. (see his 60 minutes interview and also Gibbs saying "We haven't had a policy discussion in 20 months").
To them, it's not that the American public understands and repudiates Obama's policies, it's that Obama didn't explain it clearly enough to us little minded people. He's SO smart, we're SO dumb. Arrogance unparalleled.
Sorry friend, I think it IS the policy, not the communication. But I agree that saying, "We have to pass this bill so you can see what's in it"- Pelosi, is not the best example of good communication.
By: CNN Political Producer Peter Hamby
Washington (CNN) - In the eyes of former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, President Obama's press conference last week to address his deal with Republicans on taxes and unemployment benefits was "amateurish."
"The most bizarre part of the whole process was watching President Obama self-destruct at the podium yesterday," Huckabee told the National Journal in an interview published Monday, when asked about the tax deal.
"I was just stunned - I really couldn't believe that a man that was elected president was as amateurish as he was, and essentially launched from the podium at some of his own, taking aim and mowing down everybody in D.C. and walking away having not understood that he just lost a lot of people," he said.
Huckabee called the deal "the best anyone can hope for at this point" but said he had hoped that tax rates would be extended longer than just two years.
He also questioned why the president would kick the can down the road two years, assuring that the tax debate will be renewed in the middle of his re-election campaign.
"Politically, I was shocked it was going to be two not three, because it puts this whole thing in the very center, the bull's-eye of the 2012 presidential election," said Huckabee, who is considering a repeat presidential run.
Obama said during the press conference that he welcomes a campaign fight in 2012 over the GOP's economic vision, specifically their demand to extend tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans.
I don't think that this is correct. Obama did have control of the senate and house for his first 2 years in office. now i agree that if you give a tax cut to 1 group you must give it to everyone (that's only fair) This was a smart move on Obama behalf but imho Obama has not sold it right. that seems to be the problem with the current administration. Obama campaign was so well done in terms of communication but now they can't do anything.[/quote]
But that same argument was made by admin officials, and even Obama himself. (see his 60 minutes interview and also Gibbs saying "We haven't had a policy discussion in 20 months").
To them, it's not that the American public understands and repudiates Obama's policies, it's that Obama didn't explain it clearly enough to us little minded people. He's SO smart, we're SO dumb. Arrogance unparalleled.
Sorry friend, I think it IS the policy, not the communication. But I agree that saying, "We have to pass this bill so you can see what's in it"- Pelosi, is not the best example of good communication.[/quote]
sorry i bit confused, what are you talking about? I am not saying that Obama policies are all good but i do believe that more people would agree with some of his policies if he explained them better.
:roll:
so you think that most people understand Obama policies? I don't just like most people don't really understand most policies from anywhere.
i don't believe i said anyone should be ashamed or afraid to criticize Obama for his actual Policies.
i said i was referring to the many ignorant people who critcize him for other things. take the rumor that Obama is a Muslim for example . he's not, but what i want to know is WHY whenever this gets raised, the implication is that there is something wrong with being an Arab-American or a Muslim.
Is there something wrong with being a muslim in the US?
No, Angel. you fuckin said it, now own it. Anytime someone disagrees w/ your boy, they're a racist. It's so old. I guess 58% of America is racist b/c that's how many people disapprove of Obama.
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/world/5085 ... l.html.csp
It's so old.
I'm not ashamed to criticize the man for his policies. I couldn't care less what the color of his skin is. It means nothing to me.[/quote]
i don't believe i said anyone should be ashamed or afraid to criticize Obama for his actual Policies.
i said i was referring to the many ignorant people who critcize him for other things. take the rumor that Obama is a Muslim for example . he's not, but what i want to know is WHY whenever this gets raised, the implication is that there is something wrong with being an Arab-American or a Muslim.
Is there something wrong with being a muslim in the US?[/quote]
No, Angel. you fuckin said it, now own it. Anytime someone disagrees w/ your boy, they're a racist. It's so old. I guess 58% of America is racist b/c that's how many people disapprove of Obama.
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/world/5085 ... l.html.csp
It's so old.[/quote]
no where did he say that :roll: what he was talking about is how many people in america still believe things that have been found to be false about Obama. I don't think you can deny that.
He could be a green and purple Scientologist from Saturn, and it wouldn't fucking matter.
Just so that we can fulfill your goal of having a reasonable discussion. What exactly are your issues with the president? please give me examples if possible. Thank you
'my boy'. lol. that's hilarious. a few weeks ago i was called anti american and now obama is 'my boy. lol. that's too funny,
i have no problems with people crititicizing Obama for his Policies. i've done it plenty of times.
again, for the last time, what i did say was this.
okay, I hear you.
How would you describe people who demonize all unemployed people as lazy wastes of space who just want the government to provide for them? If you want nuance when talking about the rich, then you should apply it to the poor too.