It's like saying all those Obama supporters expecting any kind of substantial change from him with regards to altering the pathways from the same old "as per usual norms" in policy were just being incredibly stupid, and dense...but we're smart.
The "as per usual" route from the MIC perspective has stepped up it's game substantially in the past 8 years.
How do you know what Obama supporters expectations are? You're not one of them, yet you take the liberty of speaking on behalf of them all the time.
Again though, 90% of your AMT posts are just plainly boiled down to being "Anti-Obama."
How do you know what Obama supporters expectations are? You're not one of them, yet you take the liberty of speaking on behalf of them all the time.
Again though, 90% of your AMT posts are just plainly boiled down to being "Anti-Obama."
So you're saying it's not the case, you speak for the Obama supporters instead of me.
Which is it?
I post all kinds of stuff. I was highly critical of Bush also. Exit one supporter...insert the next...
slowly but surely you guys are going to figure it out.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
So you're saying it's not the case, you speak for the Obama supporters instead of me.
Which is it?
I post all kinds of stuff. I was highly critical of Bush also. Exit one supporter...insert the next...
slowly but surely you guys are going to figure it out.
To answer your question, no, I don't think that is the case. I think you have a different view and expectation of the word "change" than the Obama supporters do. And for the sake of the argument, we should really wait for the Obama supporters to make it as they are who want to pretend that you are so concerned for.
And why are you more concerned with a different countries politics that you have no right to vote or participate in, than that of your own countries? Who would you have voted for if you were an American citizen and had the right to vote for the US president?
No. But, way to try and draw a line between the religious persecution of the Jews, and a couple of people hell-bent on tarnishing Obama's image before he even takes office.
To answer your question, no, I don't think that is the case. I think you have a different view and expectation of the word "change" than the Obama supporters do. And for the sake of the argument, we should really wait for the Obama supporters to make it as they are who want to pretend that you are so concerned for.
And why are you more concerned with a different countries politics that you have no right to vote or participate in, than that of your own countries? Who would you have voted for if you were an American citizen and had the right to vote for the US president?
You can't change the rules of the game if you continually agree to abide by them. I would have voted more against the current bush era philosophies rather than simply pretending to be against them by using empty catch phrases and slogans.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
No. But, way to try and draw a line between the religious persecution of the Jews, and a couple of people hell-bent on tarnishing Obama's image before he even takes office.
I think Obama is doing it all by himself, and I'm just bearing witness to it. Some referred to it as Obama comedown syndrome several months ago.
If it wasn't for critical viewpoints that put pressure on the President elect, nothing would really change at all regardless of who sits in the chair....not when you have an entity such as the MIC backed with illegal theft of taxpayer dollars turning the machine.
If US affairs only affected the US, and not the world at large, there would be valid reason to criticise foreign viewpoints.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
Outlaw, c'mon now., how can you even compare the two?
Honestly, is this how you see it? Honestly...
Sometimes i swear i AM on a different planet to some of you people.
It was partly a joke, but the idea is that these sort of terms try to discredit other people. Someone who criticizes something like Israel is labeled "anti-Semitic" and now apparently if you criticize Obama for doing something you disagree with (and rightly so) you're "anti-Obama"? How can you even be anti-Someone? It makes no sense.
It was partly a joke, but the idea is that these sort of terms try to discredit other people. Someone who criticizes something like Israel is labeled "anti-Semitic" and now apparently if you criticize Obama for doing something you disagree with (and rightly so) you're "anti-Obama"? How can you even be anti-Someone? It makes no sense.
Correct. I don't even know the guy. In fact I don't think anyone here does personally behind closed doors. He's probably extremely cool in many regards, but being cool really doesn't cut it for me, as outlined in my signature, when it's really all about policy, and in my case (being an outsider) foreign policy in particular. This is something that affects everyone (especially at present). I have little to no interest what he does internally. That's something he has to answer for to the people that live in the country he works for.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
That's something he has to answer for to the people that live in the country he works for.
Unfortunately, they won't be asking much of him. Just don't be Bush - that's a pretty low standard.
Walking can be a real trip
***********************
"We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
***********************
Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
It was partly a joke, but the idea is that these sort of terms try to discredit other people. Someone who criticizes something like Israel is labeled "anti-Semitic" and now apparently if you criticize Obama for doing something you disagree with (and rightly so) you're "anti-Obama"? How can you even be anti-Someone? It makes no sense.
That's a fair comment. Just to clarify, i don't have a problem with anyone having a negative opinion on Obama when they debate their reasons for feeling like that.
What I do have a problem with, is the people that post here, who think they know what obama supporters think and feel about issues. I'm sorry, but they are not that awesome. They cannot read minds.
That's a fair comment. Just to clarify, i don't have a problem with anyone having a negative opinion on Obama when they debate their reasons for feeling like that.
What I do have a problem with, is the people that post here, who think they know what obama supporters think and feel about issues. I'm sorry, but they are not that awesome. They cannot read minds.
From a status quo perspective it isn't that hard of a mystery to figure out (for a lot it was a lesser of two evils reality...but ultimately they chose the wrong direction to begin with if they supported Obama over all available choices) ....and those that give passes to further the phony (and illegal) war on terror as an acceptable situation are even easier to gauge.
I'm not pointing fingers, just observing expressed viewpoints I've seen in general here and elsewhere..
The bottom line is if Obama continues the pre-emptive war on terror doctrine that bush created...he's fucked, and so is the entire country.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
I know there have been a few mentions of 'sore loser's and sour grapes', but i didn't think that i had seen it on more than half a dozen times?
I can do a search if you like to see how many times those words have been used, and then at the same time i can also search the word 'sheep'. You know, that condascending word that gets dropped around here very often. I don't think that's actual discussion either.
I guess two wrongs don't make a right though. Have a look at the number of really switched on and great debaters that have stopped posting here recently. I guess eventually they get sick of being told this is how they feel and this is how they see things when time and time again they say that is not the case. It's like hitting your head against a brick wall time and time again. Eventually you can't do it anymore.
How many people here actually want good debate? Honestly. Or how many just wanna tell you how you feel, what you think, and how stupid you are because you don't think like they do?
It happens all the time. There is no denying it.
what did your search find?
I did a search just in the moving train for 'sour grapes' and it found 92 posts (93 now and 90 when you take away me and you saying it) so........
so some call Obama supporters sheep....and? that is also trying to prevent discussion or just to put someone down, my point still stands
'and I can't imagine why you wouldn't welcome any change, my brother'
'How a culture can forget its plan of yesterday
and you swear it's not a trend
it doesn't matter anyway
there's no need to talk as friends
nothing news everyday
all the kids will eat it up
if it's packaged properly'
I did a search just in the moving train for 'sour grapes' and it found 92 posts (93 now and 90 when you take away me and you saying it) so........
so some call Obama supporters sheep....and? that is also trying to prevent discussion or just to put someone down, my point still stands
I said two wrongs don't make a right.
It's ok. You win. You guys have convinced me. Obama sucks and i'm a fuckhead for trying to fight for what i believe in.
I said two wrongs don't make a right.
It's ok. You win. You guys have convinced me. Obama sucks and i'm a fuckhead for trying to fight for what i believe in.
it's not about one of us being right and the other wrong. I know you said that, i'm just saying it's a moot point is all.
'and I can't imagine why you wouldn't welcome any change, my brother'
'How a culture can forget its plan of yesterday
and you swear it's not a trend
it doesn't matter anyway
there's no need to talk as friends
nothing news everyday
all the kids will eat it up
if it's packaged properly'
Not really. It depends what the goal is. The lesser "Hollywood" or "mainstream" candidates were less status quo and offered more change at face value than what Obama actually presented, (and has still yet to present). If the goal is war these days, then status quo is your man. Ultimately this action will destroy the country given the global understanding and impressions, and interpretations, of such action (not to mention past history). Chaos will ensue the world around sure as the sun rises.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
It's too early to criticize Obama.. give him a year and then tear him down. There's no way we are going to instantly leave Iraq. No way. Bush fucked Iraq, and somebody has to pay the child support..
I am by no means a conservative, but some left wingers live in a fantasy dream world.
It's too early to criticize Obama.. give him a year and then tear him down. There's no way we are going to instantly leave Iraq. No way. Bush fucked Iraq, and somebody has to pay the child support..
I am by no means a conservative, but some left wingers live in a fantasy dream world.
I once accepted a job and on the first day I was told I had ONE MONTH to fix the system that was incredibly fucked up or I was FIRED. My methods were questioned the whole time I was there and I was happy to explain my logic. They were happy that I cleaned up their mess and that I continued to raise the bar.
I don't give people a free pass. Every job I've had has been a "jump straight in the fire" kind of gig. Sink or swim.
I think just about any working stiff has had to answer for their actions and accept criticism.
Why should we handle the President-elect with kid gloves?
Walking can be a real trip
***********************
"We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
***********************
Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
I once accepted a job and on the first day I was told I had ONE MONTH to fix the system that was incredibly fucked up or I was FIRED. My methods were questioned the whole time I was there and I was happy to explain my logic. They were happy that I cleaned up their mess and that I continued to raise the bar.
I don't give people a free pass. Every job I've had has been a "jump straight in the fire" kind of gig. Sink or swim.
I think just about any working stiff has had to answer for their actions and accept criticism.
Why should we handle the President-elect with kid gloves?
OK then. Give him a month.. He hasn't even started the job yet and he's getting criticized for work he hasn't done..
Not really. It depends what the goal is. The lesser "Hollywood" or "mainstream" candidates were less status quo and offered more change at face value than what Obama actually presented, (and has still yet to present). If the goal is war these days, then status quo is your man. Ultimately this action will destroy the country given the global understanding and impressions, and interpretations, of such action (not to mention past history). Chaos will ensue the world around sure as the sun rises.
What is life like on your high horse? It must be nice to have all the worlds answers. You are clearly the smartest one here and the rest of us (who disagrees with you) are nothing but mere imbeciles in your presence.
I didn't vote for Obama, but I'm happy to see he is doing the smart thing. I was worried that it was going to be a hasty draw down for the sake of the left.
Not really. It depends what the goal is. The lesser "Hollywood" or "mainstream" candidates were less status quo and offered more change at face value than what Obama actually presented, (and has still yet to present). If the goal is war these days, then status quo is your man. Ultimately this action will destroy the country given the global understanding and impressions, and interpretations, of such action (not to mention past history). Chaos will ensue the world around sure as the sun rises.
How do you know what Obama presented; all you ever heard was "Change" and "Yes we can." But, have you ever read his website where he explains where he stands on issues? Or, did you just get caught up in the hype? Because Obama actually holds more of my values and morals and opinions than Nader or McCain. But again, why am I telling you this, you already think you know everything about everyone and how they think.
I am actually for the war on terror. You must be agianst it. So right there, I ask that you never ever speak on behalf of ANYONE else ever again and just stick to your opinions. And remember, opinions are like ass holes, we've all got one.
Status quo; you love that phrase. I actively vote from all sides of the political aisles - don't ever pretend as though you know who I am, how I think, and what I beleive. You are one of the worst debaters on this forum because all you ever want to do is tell others what they think, and then you think you are right because you just told the other person what they think and why they are wrong. Yet, you hardly EVER answer anyone's questions.
US troops will be removed from Iraq in the next 2 years.
the generals are advising a 16 month withdrawal anyway...not complete as the op says, but still, less troops = good for the people of Iraq. soldiers are trained to do 1 thing....
US troops will be removed from Iraq in the next 2 years.
the generals are advising a 16 month withdrawal anyway...not complete as the op says, but still, less troops = good for the people of Iraq. soldiers are trained to do 1 thing....
The thing is, Obama never once even pretended to say that he was going to end our "occupation" in Iraq. That is just the OP's projection in an attempt to get others to rally with him on his anti-Obama campaign.
Comments
Again though, 90% of your AMT posts are just plainly boiled down to being "Anti-Obama."
So you're saying it's not the case, you speak for the Obama supporters instead of me.
Which is it?
I post all kinds of stuff. I was highly critical of Bush also. Exit one supporter...insert the next...
slowly but surely you guys are going to figure it out.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
This is what i mean.
And why are you more concerned with a different countries politics that you have no right to vote or participate in, than that of your own countries? Who would you have voted for if you were an American citizen and had the right to vote for the US president?
Honestly, is this how you see it? Honestly...
Sometimes i swear i AM on a different planet to some of you people.
You can't change the rules of the game if you continually agree to abide by them. I would have voted more against the current bush era philosophies rather than simply pretending to be against them by using empty catch phrases and slogans.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
I think Obama is doing it all by himself, and I'm just bearing witness to it. Some referred to it as Obama comedown syndrome several months ago.
If it wasn't for critical viewpoints that put pressure on the President elect, nothing would really change at all regardless of who sits in the chair....not when you have an entity such as the MIC backed with illegal theft of taxpayer dollars turning the machine.
If US affairs only affected the US, and not the world at large, there would be valid reason to criticise foreign viewpoints.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
Correct. I don't even know the guy. In fact I don't think anyone here does personally behind closed doors. He's probably extremely cool in many regards, but being cool really doesn't cut it for me, as outlined in my signature, when it's really all about policy, and in my case (being an outsider) foreign policy in particular. This is something that affects everyone (especially at present). I have little to no interest what he does internally. That's something he has to answer for to the people that live in the country he works for.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
Unfortunately, they won't be asking much of him. Just don't be Bush - that's a pretty low standard.
***********************
"We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
***********************
Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
What I do have a problem with, is the people that post here, who think they know what obama supporters think and feel about issues. I'm sorry, but they are not that awesome. They cannot read minds.
From a status quo perspective it isn't that hard of a mystery to figure out (for a lot it was a lesser of two evils reality...but ultimately they chose the wrong direction to begin with if they supported Obama over all available choices) ....and those that give passes to further the phony (and illegal) war on terror as an acceptable situation are even easier to gauge.
I'm not pointing fingers, just observing expressed viewpoints I've seen in general here and elsewhere..
The bottom line is if Obama continues the pre-emptive war on terror doctrine that bush created...he's fucked, and so is the entire country.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
what did your search find?
I did a search just in the moving train for 'sour grapes' and it found 92 posts (93 now and 90 when you take away me and you saying it) so........
so some call Obama supporters sheep....and? that is also trying to prevent discussion or just to put someone down, my point still stands
'How a culture can forget its plan of yesterday
and you swear it's not a trend
it doesn't matter anyway
there's no need to talk as friends
nothing news everyday
all the kids will eat it up
if it's packaged properly'
and very easily attainable.
i have to wonder though... why is it some people expect such high standards from their politicians anyway?
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Have you tried sour grapes? They're very good with tequila.
It's ok. You win. You guys have convinced me. Obama sucks and i'm a fuckhead for trying to fight for what i believe in.
it's not about one of us being right and the other wrong. I know you said that, i'm just saying it's a moot point is all.
'How a culture can forget its plan of yesterday
and you swear it's not a trend
it doesn't matter anyway
there's no need to talk as friends
nothing news everyday
all the kids will eat it up
if it's packaged properly'
Not really. It depends what the goal is. The lesser "Hollywood" or "mainstream" candidates were less status quo and offered more change at face value than what Obama actually presented, (and has still yet to present). If the goal is war these days, then status quo is your man. Ultimately this action will destroy the country given the global understanding and impressions, and interpretations, of such action (not to mention past history). Chaos will ensue the world around sure as the sun rises.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_MmPIHWJlU
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
I am by no means a conservative, but some left wingers live in a fantasy dream world.
I once accepted a job and on the first day I was told I had ONE MONTH to fix the system that was incredibly fucked up or I was FIRED. My methods were questioned the whole time I was there and I was happy to explain my logic. They were happy that I cleaned up their mess and that I continued to raise the bar.
I don't give people a free pass. Every job I've had has been a "jump straight in the fire" kind of gig. Sink or swim.
I think just about any working stiff has had to answer for their actions and accept criticism.
Why should we handle the President-elect with kid gloves?
***********************
"We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
***********************
Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
Dude, seriously, get off your horse.
I am actually for the war on terror. You must be agianst it. So right there, I ask that you never ever speak on behalf of ANYONE else ever again and just stick to your opinions. And remember, opinions are like ass holes, we've all got one.
Status quo; you love that phrase. I actively vote from all sides of the political aisles - don't ever pretend as though you know who I am, how I think, and what I beleive. You are one of the worst debaters on this forum because all you ever want to do is tell others what they think, and then you think you are right because you just told the other person what they think and why they are wrong. Yet, you hardly EVER answer anyone's questions.
the generals are advising a 16 month withdrawal anyway...not complete as the op says, but still, less troops = good for the people of Iraq. soldiers are trained to do 1 thing....