Oh dear Mr Obama.

Enter at your own risk.

Moderators: thunder, Gillian, Chari910, catloveyes, Helen8, fruitbat, kjshd05, Marie, LadyLucius

Post Reply
User avatar
Heather
Posts: 398
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 1:51 pm
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Contact:

Oh dear Mr Obama.

Post by Heather » Wed Nov 03, 2010 9:02 am

Far be it from me to believe I know anything about American politics but it seems to me that one of Mr Obamas problems is that he is all about the promises and plans for the future but as yet he has failed on all counts. What I am trying to say is that he seems to be all talk and no action.

I have seen more charismatic vegetables. :furthermore

User avatar
Lisabella
Posts: 303
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 12:06 pm
Location: next door to alice
Contact:

Post by Lisabella » Wed Nov 03, 2010 10:08 am

that he seems to be all talk and no action.
Well, I guess it's the problem with every single politician in the world :D

User avatar
a.p.k.
Posts: 407
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 3:23 pm

Post by a.p.k. » Wed Nov 03, 2010 10:32 am

Not that I love the Guardian, but they put it very simply:

Obama has done astonishingly well – on paper. In two gruelling years, he has delivered on three of the five promises he set up as the pillars of his "new foundation" in a speech of April 2009: healthcare, education reform and financial re-regulation. More than any president in recent memory, he has delivered historic breakthroughs, as well as holding the ring for a crucial US stimulus package.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... -elections


The horrible economic situation he inherited from the Republicans. The fact that it isn't totally reversed cannot be laid at his feet, IMO. It's not like the US economy exists in a vacuum, you know?


I'm not living in the US anymore, but it really burns me that he's not getting credit for what he's done.

User avatar
Heather
Posts: 398
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 1:51 pm
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Contact:

Post by Heather » Wed Nov 03, 2010 10:54 am

Maybe part of the problem is that he isn't pushy enough, since he has been elected we here in the UK have barely heard anything about him. When George Bush was the president you couldn't open a paper without his goofy face looking at you. George playing golf, George and Laura taking the dog for a walk, George spending the weekend with the Blairs, George in trouble yet again for putting his foot in it.

I suppose Obama hasn't been in that long and he deserves more time although according to the article I was reading today Rebublican gains will complicate his ability to enact his proposals during the last two years of his term and possibly force him to fight off attacks on health care legislation and other bills already signed into law. And according to four in ten voters they are financially worse off then they were two years ago. is that just guilt by association? I wonder, it's just like here, I loved Gordon Brown but it seemed to me that he alone carried the blame for the shocking state of the UK economy. So unfair!

User avatar
Hilary the Touched
Site Registrant
Posts: 6966
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 2:11 pm
Location: The Frozen North
Contact:

Post by Hilary the Touched » Wed Nov 03, 2010 11:26 am

Heather, as a.p.k. points out, most of our current financial disaster is the result of Bush administration policies; all the Republican screaming and yelling about Pres. Obama overstepping constitutional limitations overlooks the fact that TARP (the Troubled Assets Relief Plan) was signed by Bush before he left office.
And our system accords Mr. Obama little independent power: the Republicans in both Senate and House fought tooth and nail to prevent passage of ANY of his initiatives. One of the reasons Bush was so successful was that he and his cronies just steam-rolled over any dissension--I do fault the current president for not being more effective in getting congressional support for his plans. Democrats bent over backwards, gutting his legislation to try and gain some Republican support for anything, but they just balked. When previously in power, they enacted changes to rules on filibusters etc. that they are now taking full advantage of--the bastards.

An acquaintance posted this observation on Facebook recently (CAUTION: lots o' profanity):

"Right now roughly 50% of the "common man" votes his/her best interests, the top 1%* vote theirs, and 49% of the "common man" votes for the top 1%. Unfortunately, when one speaks of better educating voters it is viewed as condescending. One almost has to admire the top 1% for this.

I mean it really is the best pimp-move EVER. No matter how many times they're whored out and pimp-slapped by the top 1%, they keep running back and doing the pimp's bidding. Their drug that the pimp keeps 'em hooked on so they continue to be their bitch is the belief that one day, they too, will be on the same level as the pimp and have a mansion, yacht, Bentley, etc.

The reality though is that the majority of them will just spend their lives on their backs or bent over until they're not worth fucking anymore and then they're cast aside and can't figure out why they have nothing in their golden years. The answer is simple: Because whores don't ride happily off into the sunset. Pimps do."

*he meant the wealthiest 1%

User avatar
Heather
Posts: 398
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 1:51 pm
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Contact:

Post by Heather » Wed Nov 03, 2010 11:57 am

Hilary the Touched wrote:
An acquaintance posted this observation on Facebook recently (CAUTION: lots o' profanity):

"Right now roughly 50% of the "common man" votes his/her best interests, the top 1%* vote theirs, and 49% of the "common man" votes for the top 1%. Unfortunately, when one speaks of better educating voters it is viewed as condescending. One almost has to admire the top 1% for this.

I mean it really is the best pimp-move EVER. No matter how many times they're whored out and pimp-slapped by the top 1%, they keep running back and doing the pimp's bidding. Their drug that the pimp keeps 'em hooked on so they continue to be their bitch is the belief that one day, they too, will be on the same level as the pimp and have a mansion, yacht, Bentley, etc.

The reality though is that the majority of them will just spend their lives on their backs or bent over until they're not worth fucking anymore and then they're cast aside and can't figure out why they have nothing in their golden years. The answer is simple: Because whores don't ride happily off into the sunset. Pimps do."

*he meant the wealthiest 1%

I had to read it a couple of times but I understand completely and absolutely agree.

We are in such a mess in the UK it's a relief to know that someone elses political situation is as bad.

We have a government just now that no one has voted for, Smarmy Dave and Drippy Nick. Look for the dictionary definition of useless and those two should have a mention, they are already falling out which is good in a way because we can get back to the polls and get a Government that we HAVE voted for. I am so sick of the pair of them blaming the previous Government for all the problems in the country. They have stopped Child Benefit for all and now just give it to some, everything is under scruitany and you can bet that all of the cuts in the benefit system will target the most vulnerable and those least likely to fight for themselves. Next thing the NHS will go and we will have to pay for medical care, that really worries me.

User avatar
Helen8
Pillar of the Community
Posts: 8972
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 11:18 am
Location: SoCal

Post by Helen8 » Wed Nov 03, 2010 12:44 pm

When George Bush was the president you couldn't open a paper without his goofy face looking at you.

Heather, were those Rupert Murdoch-owned newspapers? He single-handedly has kept the conservative agenda at the fore.

Democrats bent over backwards, gutting his legislation to try and gain some Republican support for anything, but they just balked.

And after watering down all the legislation to try to get the Republicans on board, they (Republicans) still didn't vote for the legislation (with the exception of 2 or 3 centrist Republicans), and took credit for excising some of the best parts of the original legislations, e.g., the public option, which would have been good for the individuals but so bad for the poor insurance companies. So, in retrospect, since the Dems had the 60-vote, filibuster-proof majority, they should have gone right ahead and pass the original, beneficial legislation without any Republican votes, because there were no votes from them after all.

User avatar
Heather
Posts: 398
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 1:51 pm
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Contact:

Post by Heather » Wed Nov 03, 2010 3:38 pm

Helen8 wrote:When George Bush was the president you couldn't open a paper without his goofy face looking at you.

Heather, were those Rupert Murdoch-owned newspapers? He single-handedly has kept the conservative agenda at the fore.
.
Yes Helen, you are right, it never fails to amaze me how much influence some Newspapers have. The Sun is the worst and I believe it is one of his. It is a paper I never buy, their "Journalists" have hounded at least two people so badly they have been driven to suicide.

I have to tell you the very latest. I think they have just about had a stand up fight in The House Of Commons today over Smarmy Dave employing a photographer and paying him 35,000 quid a year OFF THE CIVIL LIST!! PAID FOR BY TAX PAYERS!! To airbrush his photos and make him look good. :shock:

grannybear
Posts: 2582
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 3:36 pm
Location: Florida

Post by grannybear » Wed Nov 03, 2010 4:59 pm

What gets me is that after 2 years of Republicans voting a straight NO to almost everything the Democrats are told they have to be bipartisan.
Something is wrong with this picture. It's going to get interesting.

Foodie
Posts: 239
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 4:55 pm
Location: Washington State

Post by Foodie » Sat Nov 06, 2010 4:00 pm

Sometimes I feel that the Dems are too kind, too bent on trying to please everybody. The Reps will always take advantage of anything the can get their hands on, and are masters at acting like victims over anything they dislike. I feel like maybe the Dems need to learn to steam roll over people too sometimes, apparently that's a sign of strength in politics?

Gilly_sirl
Posts: 177
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 11:09 pm
Location: Canada

Post by Gilly_sirl » Sat Nov 06, 2010 8:57 pm

I heard something on the radio yesterday that made a lot of sense : "Republicans will do anything to win. Democrats will do anything to be right." I think it sums it up pretty nicely.

I get very angry watching the news, these days. About the whole world, really, but what is going in the States takes the cake. I feel absolutely no sympathy for the Tea Party and their ilk. They think they're fighting for freedom, but what they mainly care about is instant gratification and short-term profit. Freedom comes with responsibility, and their gun-toting, xenophobic, climate skeptic, bigoted stance is far from showing responsibility: it's just "après nous le déluge" stupidity.

The country President Obama inherited the government of was already addled with debt, useless wars, and a greed-fueled economic crisis. It's not going to go away in two years, and he's certainly not the one to blame for the sorry state of things. But I suppose it's a sign of our 140-characters-long, ADD times that people seem to think so.

Oh well, that was my rant.

grannybear
Posts: 2582
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 3:36 pm
Location: Florida

Post by grannybear » Sat Nov 06, 2010 9:29 pm

I told myself I would stay out of political discussions but here I am.
I love my country and wouldn't want to live anyplace else but I get so mad.
It's turned into a country of Me-Me-Me. I got mine so the heck with anyone else.
And they call themselves Christians. They should all be ashamed of themselves.
We should all be helping each other and that goes for both here and abroad.
Now I'll shut my mouth and go have a cold beer to cool down.

Post Reply