Obama gets peace prize for not being Bush!

[Arraya]

Bri- I’m a lefty that did not vote for Obama because I was so disgusted with politics. I hate to say it because of the political implications. But Obama is going to get killed when TSHTF, and it’s starting. I understand he had to say unrealistic things to get into office, that’s just politics, but it will be the political death of him. Rush is giddy like a school girl with excitement.

[briansd1]

Arraya, I’m not so disgusted as you are. I think that politics can be fun.

Obama will be fine. He’ll get reelected. A friend of mine just moved to Washington, DC, so I’ll have a convenient place to stay for the 2013 inauguration.

Obama saying unrealistic things to get into office is part of the game. It would the political death of him not to do so.

I don’t think that TS will hit the fan until China gets stronger and fully modernizes its military to rival ours. At that point, our military and economic influence will really suffer and we’ll really have to tighten the belt. There will be a lot of discontent.

The professor talked about Krugman-esqe policies that will drive our country to bankruptcy. Republican and Democrats have been guilty of the same (Republicans more so). But I’d much rather have Democrats in power.

Yeah, it’s starting, but it’ll take a few more decades in my opinion.

I guess that time will tell. I plan to live to a ripe old age so I’ll get to see the future unfold.

[briansd1]

Arraya, I’m not so disgusted as you are. I think that politics can be fun.

Obama will be fine. He’ll get reelected. A friend of mine just moved to Washington, DC, so I’ll have a convenient place to stay for the 2013 inauguration.

Obama saying unrealistic things to get into office is part of the game. It would the political death of him not to do so.

I don’t think that TS will hit the fan until China gets stronger and fully modernizes its military to rival ours. At that point, our military and economic influence will really suffer and we’ll really have to tighten the belt. There will be a lot of discontent.

The professor talked about Krugman-esqe policies that will drive our country to bankruptcy. Republican and Democrats have been guilty of the same (Republicans more so). But I’d much rather have Democrats in power.

Yeah, it’s starting, but it’ll take a few more decades in my opinion.

I guess that time will tell. I plan to live to a ripe old age so I’ll get to see the future unfold.

[briansd1]

Arraya, I’m not so disgusted as you are. I think that politics can be fun.

Obama will be fine. He’ll get reelected. A friend of mine just moved to Washington, DC, so I’ll have a convenient place to stay for the 2013 inauguration.

Obama saying unrealistic things to get into office is part of the game. It would the political death of him not to do so.

I don’t think that TS will hit the fan until China gets stronger and fully modernizes its military to rival ours. At that point, our military and economic influence will really suffer and we’ll really have to tighten the belt. There will be a lot of discontent.

The professor talked about Krugman-esqe policies that will drive our country to bankruptcy. Republican and Democrats have been guilty of the same (Republicans more so). But I’d much rather have Democrats in power.

Yeah, it’s starting, but it’ll take a few more decades in my opinion.

I guess that time will tell. I plan to live to a ripe old age so I’ll get to see the future unfold.

[briansd1]

Arraya, I’m not so disgusted as you are. I think that politics can be fun.

Obama will be fine. He’ll get reelected. A friend of mine just moved to Washington, DC, so I’ll have a convenient place to stay for the 2013 inauguration.

Obama saying unrealistic things to get into office is part of the game. It would the political death of him not to do so.

I don’t think that TS will hit the fan until China gets stronger and fully modernizes its military to rival ours. At that point, our military and economic influence will really suffer and we’ll really have to tighten the belt. There will be a lot of discontent.

The professor talked about Krugman-esqe policies that will drive our country to bankruptcy. Republican and Democrats have been guilty of the same (Republicans more so). But I’d much rather have Democrats in power.

Yeah, it’s starting, but it’ll take a few more decades in my opinion.

I guess that time will tell. I plan to live to a ripe old age so I’ll get to see the future unfold.

[briansd1]

Arraya, I’m not so disgusted as you are. I think that politics can be fun.

Obama will be fine. He’ll get reelected. A friend of mine just moved to Washington, DC, so I’ll have a convenient place to stay for the 2013 inauguration.

Obama saying unrealistic things to get into office is part of the game. It would the political death of him not to do so.

I don’t think that TS will hit the fan until China gets stronger and fully modernizes its military to rival ours. At that point, our military and economic influence will really suffer and we’ll really have to tighten the belt. There will be a lot of discontent.

The professor talked about Krugman-esqe policies that will drive our country to bankruptcy. Republican and Democrats have been guilty of the same (Republicans more so). But I’d much rather have Democrats in power.

Yeah, it’s starting, but it’ll take a few more decades in my opinion.

I guess that time will tell. I plan to live to a ripe old age so I’ll get to see the future unfold.

[surveyor]

[quote=Arraya]
Haha…. No it sounded SOOO stupid. At least in the respect that we would let it drive our foreign policy. But alas we were baited into an un-winnable war because the child president and his band of merry henchmen didn’t want to get called pussies. Boy did we show them.

There will be cheering in the streets of Islamabad when we leave because we can’t fund the war anymore. The right will howl in righteous indignation and the 2012 campaign slogan for the GOP will be “blame the black guy”.

We’re fucking nuts.[/quote]

And yet the quote was true, wasn’t it? It sounded stupid to you, but it turned out to be true. Another right-wing myth disproven, eh?

But here’s the thing – bin laden had to kill almost 3000 of us on our own soil before we had to take the problem seriously. Does that sound like we got “baited” into a war?

Here’s the thing – Obama wanted the job. If he can’t do the job then he will be replaced. Simple as that. It has nothing to do whether he started it. He wanted the job he said he could do it and he better do it. Otherwise yes the blame falls on him. That’s how it works.

“The buck stops here.” – Harry Truman

[surveyor]

[quote=Arraya]
Haha…. No it sounded SOOO stupid. At least in the respect that we would let it drive our foreign policy. But alas we were baited into an un-winnable war because the child president and his band of merry henchmen didn’t want to get called pussies. Boy did we show them.

There will be cheering in the streets of Islamabad when we leave because we can’t fund the war anymore. The right will howl in righteous indignation and the 2012 campaign slogan for the GOP will be “blame the black guy”.

We’re fucking nuts.[/quote]

And yet the quote was true, wasn’t it? It sounded stupid to you, but it turned out to be true. Another right-wing myth disproven, eh?

But here’s the thing – bin laden had to kill almost 3000 of us on our own soil before we had to take the problem seriously. Does that sound like we got “baited” into a war?

Here’s the thing – Obama wanted the job. If he can’t do the job then he will be replaced. Simple as that. It has nothing to do whether he started it. He wanted the job he said he could do it and he better do it. Otherwise yes the blame falls on him. That’s how it works.

“The buck stops here.” – Harry Truman

[surveyor]

[quote=Arraya]
Haha…. No it sounded SOOO stupid. At least in the respect that we would let it drive our foreign policy. But alas we were baited into an un-winnable war because the child president and his band of merry henchmen didn’t want to get called pussies. Boy did we show them.

There will be cheering in the streets of Islamabad when we leave because we can’t fund the war anymore. The right will howl in righteous indignation and the 2012 campaign slogan for the GOP will be “blame the black guy”.

We’re fucking nuts.[/quote]

And yet the quote was true, wasn’t it? It sounded stupid to you, but it turned out to be true. Another right-wing myth disproven, eh?

But here’s the thing – bin laden had to kill almost 3000 of us on our own soil before we had to take the problem seriously. Does that sound like we got “baited” into a war?

Here’s the thing – Obama wanted the job. If he can’t do the job then he will be replaced. Simple as that. It has nothing to do whether he started it. He wanted the job he said he could do it and he better do it. Otherwise yes the blame falls on him. That’s how it works.

“The buck stops here.” – Harry Truman

[surveyor]

[quote=Arraya]
Haha…. No it sounded SOOO stupid. At least in the respect that we would let it drive our foreign policy. But alas we were baited into an un-winnable war because the child president and his band of merry henchmen didn’t want to get called pussies. Boy did we show them.

There will be cheering in the streets of Islamabad when we leave because we can’t fund the war anymore. The right will howl in righteous indignation and the 2012 campaign slogan for the GOP will be “blame the black guy”.

We’re fucking nuts.[/quote]

And yet the quote was true, wasn’t it? It sounded stupid to you, but it turned out to be true. Another right-wing myth disproven, eh?

But here’s the thing – bin laden had to kill almost 3000 of us on our own soil before we had to take the problem seriously. Does that sound like we got “baited” into a war?

Here’s the thing – Obama wanted the job. If he can’t do the job then he will be replaced. Simple as that. It has nothing to do whether he started it. He wanted the job he said he could do it and he better do it. Otherwise yes the blame falls on him. That’s how it works.

“The buck stops here.” – Harry Truman

[surveyor]

[quote=Arraya]
Haha…. No it sounded SOOO stupid. At least in the respect that we would let it drive our foreign policy. But alas we were baited into an un-winnable war because the child president and his band of merry henchmen didn’t want to get called pussies. Boy did we show them.

There will be cheering in the streets of Islamabad when we leave because we can’t fund the war anymore. The right will howl in righteous indignation and the 2012 campaign slogan for the GOP will be “blame the black guy”.

We’re fucking nuts.[/quote]

And yet the quote was true, wasn’t it? It sounded stupid to you, but it turned out to be true. Another right-wing myth disproven, eh?

But here’s the thing – bin laden had to kill almost 3000 of us on our own soil before we had to take the problem seriously. Does that sound like we got “baited” into a war?

Here’s the thing – Obama wanted the job. If he can’t do the job then he will be replaced. Simple as that. It has nothing to do whether he started it. He wanted the job he said he could do it and he better do it. Otherwise yes the blame falls on him. That’s how it works.

“The buck stops here.” – Harry Truman

[ucodegen]

I thought that we were the liberators of the Iraqi people. Remember the parades of flowers and candy?

Since when did we become the attackers?

Focusing on a nit to avoid the point. There is a difference between attacking a country or its government and attacking its people. The US took considerable pains to avoid ‘collateral’ damage. As for being the ‘liberators’.. that is an arguable description.

Oh, ok. Trickle down protection. I’m sure the Europeans love that. We protect them first and some benefits trickle down to us. Why should they lift a finger when we are doing the lifting?

I thought that conservatives believed that our national interests should take first priority.

Huh?? I noticed that you took the quote out of context, which included “You said it.. not I…”. The first statements does not make sense and seems to be a bad attempt at an analogy to ‘trickle down economics’. Not the same thing. As we are seeing during the mortgage implosion, European economics and US economics are interlocked, though to which state they are really interlocked is hard to determine.

So why are we doing all the hard work for the Europeans who don’t appreciate us? So we bitch about their bitching. Our men are dying and our treasure is being spent.

To some extent, I wonder about this too.. which is why I even stated it . I do know that even though the EU is the primary consumer of Middle East oil and does not have coal nor shale-oil reserves, the effect on the EU due to changes in the Middle East will affect the US to some extent. Is the expense we are spending in lives and money worth what we could potentially get back in return through preventing economic or other problems.. not likely. Another item to note; of the EU nations, only Britain, which is technically not in the EU, has a ‘usable’ military. The rest largely depend upon the US’s through the UN.

If the Europeans feels that security welfare is an entitlement, then they have no incentives but to sit on their asses and collect the welfare. They don’t even pay taxes for that welfare. What a great deal for them!

You’ll get no argument from me here. To some extent, that it the point I was making. For another interesting point, look at the amount that the US contributes to the UN.. and then look at the general UN behavior.

[ucodegen]

I thought that we were the liberators of the Iraqi people. Remember the parades of flowers and candy?

Since when did we become the attackers?

Focusing on a nit to avoid the point. There is a difference between attacking a country or its government and attacking its people. The US took considerable pains to avoid ‘collateral’ damage. As for being the ‘liberators’.. that is an arguable description.

Oh, ok. Trickle down protection. I’m sure the Europeans love that. We protect them first and some benefits trickle down to us. Why should they lift a finger when we are doing the lifting?

I thought that conservatives believed that our national interests should take first priority.

Huh?? I noticed that you took the quote out of context, which included “You said it.. not I…”. The first statements does not make sense and seems to be a bad attempt at an analogy to ‘trickle down economics’. Not the same thing. As we are seeing during the mortgage implosion, European economics and US economics are interlocked, though to which state they are really interlocked is hard to determine.

So why are we doing all the hard work for the Europeans who don’t appreciate us? So we bitch about their bitching. Our men are dying and our treasure is being spent.

To some extent, I wonder about this too.. which is why I even stated it . I do know that even though the EU is the primary consumer of Middle East oil and does not have coal nor shale-oil reserves, the effect on the EU due to changes in the Middle East will affect the US to some extent. Is the expense we are spending in lives and money worth what we could potentially get back in return through preventing economic or other problems.. not likely. Another item to note; of the EU nations, only Britain, which is technically not in the EU, has a ‘usable’ military. The rest largely depend upon the US’s through the UN.

If the Europeans feels that security welfare is an entitlement, then they have no incentives but to sit on their asses and collect the welfare. They don’t even pay taxes for that welfare. What a great deal for them!

You’ll get no argument from me here. To some extent, that it the point I was making. For another interesting point, look at the amount that the US contributes to the UN.. and then look at the general UN behavior.

[ucodegen]

I thought that we were the liberators of the Iraqi people. Remember the parades of flowers and candy?

Since when did we become the attackers?

Focusing on a nit to avoid the point. There is a difference between attacking a country or its government and attacking its people. The US took considerable pains to avoid ‘collateral’ damage. As for being the ‘liberators’.. that is an arguable description.

Oh, ok. Trickle down protection. I’m sure the Europeans love that. We protect them first and some benefits trickle down to us. Why should they lift a finger when we are doing the lifting?

I thought that conservatives believed that our national interests should take first priority.

Huh?? I noticed that you took the quote out of context, which included “You said it.. not I…”. The first statements does not make sense and seems to be a bad attempt at an analogy to ‘trickle down economics’. Not the same thing. As we are seeing during the mortgage implosion, European economics and US economics are interlocked, though to which state they are really interlocked is hard to determine.

So why are we doing all the hard work for the Europeans who don’t appreciate us? So we bitch about their bitching. Our men are dying and our treasure is being spent.

To some extent, I wonder about this too.. which is why I even stated it . I do know that even though the EU is the primary consumer of Middle East oil and does not have coal nor shale-oil reserves, the effect on the EU due to changes in the Middle East will affect the US to some extent. Is the expense we are spending in lives and money worth what we could potentially get back in return through preventing economic or other problems.. not likely. Another item to note; of the EU nations, only Britain, which is technically not in the EU, has a ‘usable’ military. The rest largely depend upon the US’s through the UN.

If the Europeans feels that security welfare is an entitlement, then they have no incentives but to sit on their asses and collect the welfare. They don’t even pay taxes for that welfare. What a great deal for them!

You’ll get no argument from me here. To some extent, that it the point I was making. For another interesting point, look at the amount that the US contributes to the UN.. and then look at the general UN behavior.

[ucodegen]

I thought that we were the liberators of the Iraqi people. Remember the parades of flowers and candy?

Since when did we become the attackers?

Focusing on a nit to avoid the point. There is a difference between attacking a country or its government and attacking its people. The US took considerable pains to avoid ‘collateral’ damage. As for being the ‘liberators’.. that is an arguable description.

Oh, ok. Trickle down protection. I’m sure the Europeans love that. We protect them first and some benefits trickle down to us. Why should they lift a finger when we are doing the lifting?

I thought that conservatives believed that our national interests should take first priority.

Huh?? I noticed that you took the quote out of context, which included “You said it.. not I…”. The first statements does not make sense and seems to be a bad attempt at an analogy to ‘trickle down economics’. Not the same thing. As we are seeing during the mortgage implosion, European economics and US economics are interlocked, though to which state they are really interlocked is hard to determine.

So why are we doing all the hard work for the Europeans who don’t appreciate us? So we bitch about their bitching. Our men are dying and our treasure is being spent.

To some extent, I wonder about this too.. which is why I even stated it . I do know that even though the EU is the primary consumer of Middle East oil and does not have coal nor shale-oil reserves, the effect on the EU due to changes in the Middle East will affect the US to some extent. Is the expense we are spending in lives and money worth what we could potentially get back in return through preventing economic or other problems.. not likely. Another item to note; of the EU nations, only Britain, which is technically not in the EU, has a ‘usable’ military. The rest largely depend upon the US’s through the UN.

If the Europeans feels that security welfare is an entitlement, then they have no incentives but to sit on their asses and collect the welfare. They don’t even pay taxes for that welfare. What a great deal for them!

You’ll get no argument from me here. To some extent, that it the point I was making. For another interesting point, look at the amount that the US contributes to the UN.. and then look at the general UN behavior.

[Author]

Posts