 |
|
As the President described the “mess” that he inherited from G.W. Bush when he “walked through the door”, the cameras panned to Senator John McCain, who, although you could not hear him, mouthed the words to another senator, “That’s a bunch of bull s***”.
John McCain just earned major cool points in Mr. Man’s book.
Here’s the deal. While the president is saying things that would lead us to believe that he plans to govern from a slightly left of center point of view instead of a totally left of center as he has, why should we believe him?
He hasn’t learned to listen to the American people despite the message sent from Massachusetts (and more to come in November). He thinks he is right and governs as such. Jesus operated the same way, but He is God, after all. Maybe someone needs to remind Obama that he isn’t.
The proof is in the pudding, baby. Your actions have spoken much louder than your words, Mr. President. You speak of a bipartisan environment, but your track record thus far does not reflect such. However, let’s take a look at your words tonight.
“We can lay blame all we want, but I’m not interested in re-litigating the past” -Really, Mr. President? Then why do you continue to blame former President Bush? You have been in office for a year now. This is your responsibility. This is the job you asked for.You talk about the deficit that you inherited. Have you forgotten the we experienced the worst attack ever to occur on American soil, waged two wars, stimulated the economy with two tax cuts, encouraged small businesses to grow with incentives, and saw the cyclical economy begin to decline. As John McCain stated, let’s just call it a “B.I.O.B.” party. “Blame it on Bush.” When will you accept the responsibility for the job you were elected to do?
“The military must know that they have our full support”-I agree with the words, Mr. President, but your actions say otherwise. Please tell me why it took you more than two months to make a decision on the troop surge in Afghanistan. What ever happened to following your campaign promise of listening to your generals on the ground? General McChrystal told you in August what he needed to execute the war and you decided to give it to him in December. If you don’t trust your military leaders to make the proper evaluation before they come to you with recommendations , then, sir, you need new military leadership.
“We were sent here to serve our constituents, not our political ambitions.” -Great reminder, Mr. President. No, really. I’m giving you credit here. If the leadership in Congress would follow this advice, then maybe we could get a beneficial and fiscally-responsible health-care reform bill passed through Congress to benefit the American people and protect our tax dollars. We have the best health care system in the world. Why turn this over to the government? I’m certain that the private industriousness of the American citizenry can do better.
“I know that there are many Americans who question whether I can still deliver ‘change we can believe in.’” This is the question, sir. You have a year under your belt now and the tone hasn’t changed in Washington. I know that it will take time. I know that you can’t do it alone. However, when will you take a stand and demand it and show it in your actions?
"Jobs will be a priority in 2010."- Were they not a priority in in 2009? Just a question. My wife wants to know since she lost her job last year. Along with seven million other Americans.
I won't even mention that he completely glossed over one of the top issues in Americans' minds: terrorism.
Oooops. I just did. My bad.
He is charming. He is charismatic. And he speaks with no Negro dialect, Harry Reid ( Sorry-I couldn't help myself). But until your actions prove otherwise, they are just words.
Lead the way as you said you would. For all Americans. Not just for those who agree with you. Many of these things you said tonight are the same as what you said on the campaign trail. When will you stop campaigning and start leading? When will your actions speak louder than your words?
Mr. President. I hope you prove me wrong. Please prove me wrong. In my heart of hearts, I don't want your policies to cause you to fail.
And dammit... Stop blaming Bush. And Don’t Blame The Man.
Mr. Man
P.S. By the way…didn’t Nancy Pelosi look like the star of The Crow? Just sayin’.
Share this post!
Hits: 254
What people have to say (28)
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by Spiny Norman, January 28, 2010
@DF...
Get a copy of Obama's speeches from a year ago. Compare them to last night's speech.
Except for the few "My bads" where he "took responsibility", there is little or no difference.
What was so amazing about the rhetoric as usual?
Get a copy of Obama's speeches from a year ago. Compare them to last night's speech.
Except for the few "My bads" where he "took responsibility", there is little or no difference.
What was so amazing about the rhetoric as usual?
-
- +0
-
-
written by Spiny Norman, January 28, 2010
And I think Pelosi looks much more like the Crypt Keeper than the Crow...
-
- +0
-
-
written by BellaDaddy, January 28, 2010
Personally? I cant do it anymore...I cannot comment any further on these Obama/politically bashing columns...it just gets too sickening for me to read. It is difficult to comprehend the venom that exists in our country over this administration...and yet, here it is...in print...Sad!
Mr. Man, I too, hope Obama and his admnistration prove you wrong...but rest a*sured, if he does, I will not be the one to rub it in your face. I will wish you the best, and will hope you pay it forward.
Mr. Man, I too, hope Obama and his admnistration prove you wrong...but rest a*sured, if he does, I will not be the one to rub it in your face. I will wish you the best, and will hope you pay it forward.
-
- +0
-
-
written by WeaselMomma, January 28, 2010
Disagreement doesn't constitute bashing. Holding a man to his words does not constitute rubbing faces in it. There is nothing wrong with respectful discourse. I find no venom in this article. Venom usually comes out in the comments related to this type of hot button topic.
So far today, I am glad to see that is not case here. That said, I am relieved to see the community of Dad Blogs tiring of arguing with each other on topics that we will never agree on. Granted, we are free to write on and discuss any topic that we like, but these arguments are distracting us from the purpose of our little online community. We are here to support each other in the endeavor of parenthood, with a focus on FatherHood.
We are here to gain strength and prospective from other parents to gain more tools for our personal parenting toolboxes. We are here for community and camaraderie. We are here to acknowledge that dads aren't second cla*s parents. Let's never lose our focus.
That is not to say that we can not have disagreement, discourse. That is not to say that there aren't fiery discussions we should be having. I'm just saying I would rather be reading articles on the challenges of parenting and how we can help our families and each other through them.
Maybe my girl parts are showing here, but I don't think I am the only one that has tired over the visceral debates taking place in the comments.
Instead, send me a Dear WeaselMomma Letter @ weaselmomma@yahoo.com, that we can all enjoy, benefit from and maybe even laugh a little.
So far today, I am glad to see that is not case here. That said, I am relieved to see the community of Dad Blogs tiring of arguing with each other on topics that we will never agree on. Granted, we are free to write on and discuss any topic that we like, but these arguments are distracting us from the purpose of our little online community. We are here to support each other in the endeavor of parenthood, with a focus on FatherHood.
We are here to gain strength and prospective from other parents to gain more tools for our personal parenting toolboxes. We are here for community and camaraderie. We are here to acknowledge that dads aren't second cla*s parents. Let's never lose our focus.
That is not to say that we can not have disagreement, discourse. That is not to say that there aren't fiery discussions we should be having. I'm just saying I would rather be reading articles on the challenges of parenting and how we can help our families and each other through them.
Maybe my girl parts are showing here, but I don't think I am the only one that has tired over the visceral debates taking place in the comments.
Instead, send me a Dear WeaselMomma Letter @ weaselmomma@yahoo.com, that we can all enjoy, benefit from and maybe even laugh a little.
-
- +0
-
-
written by BellaDaddy, January 28, 2010
Sorry, I will no longer take the bait...although I do have to give kudos where kudos are warrnted...Good Plug Weaselmomma...
Folks, I am Done.
BellaDaddy
Folks, I am Done.
BellaDaddy
-
- +0
-
-
written by Mr. Man, January 28, 2010
@WeaselMomma makes a good point as well as @BellaDaddy. I just got through reading @steelydad's "State of Disillusion" and the the comments that follow. It is those types of diatribes that always makes me pause before writing something political in this forum.
If anyone is interested, the reason that I write columns like this is because I personally am interested in a serious discussion about the issues. With respect to one another. Possibly even be persuaded by someone logical position on the issues. I respect the opinions of the readers here at Dad-Blogs and it truly pains me to watch a good column get highjacked with personal attacks. By the way-the authors of these posts should not attack the commenters either.
Political discussion, I would suggest, does have a place on Dad-Blogs. Along with religion, pop-culture, and other topics. Political decisions made today (or eight years ago) DO have an impact on our children and their generation. That's another reason why I am pa*sionate about the subject. It has bearing on the type of lives our children will have and the world they will live in as adults.
So, I understand and appreciate the pa*sion. I write about politics because I am pa*sionate about my kids' futures. I am thankful that the discussion has not gone negative here today, but don't let the discussion die on these types of topics. You add value to the larger body of knowledge when your respectful discussion is presented. I can't speak for others, but I don't write to inflame. I write because I respect what you're thinking. I want to have the opportunity to learn from you.
Lastly, President Obama has the potential to be a unique and transformational leader. As I mentioned, I don't want to see him fail. His failure would mean failure for our entire nation. Despite the side of the fence you sit on, I don't believe any of us wants to see that happen.
If anyone is interested, the reason that I write columns like this is because I personally am interested in a serious discussion about the issues. With respect to one another. Possibly even be persuaded by someone logical position on the issues. I respect the opinions of the readers here at Dad-Blogs and it truly pains me to watch a good column get highjacked with personal attacks. By the way-the authors of these posts should not attack the commenters either.
Political discussion, I would suggest, does have a place on Dad-Blogs. Along with religion, pop-culture, and other topics. Political decisions made today (or eight years ago) DO have an impact on our children and their generation. That's another reason why I am pa*sionate about the subject. It has bearing on the type of lives our children will have and the world they will live in as adults.
So, I understand and appreciate the pa*sion. I write about politics because I am pa*sionate about my kids' futures. I am thankful that the discussion has not gone negative here today, but don't let the discussion die on these types of topics. You add value to the larger body of knowledge when your respectful discussion is presented. I can't speak for others, but I don't write to inflame. I write because I respect what you're thinking. I want to have the opportunity to learn from you.
Lastly, President Obama has the potential to be a unique and transformational leader. As I mentioned, I don't want to see him fail. His failure would mean failure for our entire nation. Despite the side of the fence you sit on, I don't believe any of us wants to see that happen.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Spuds, January 28, 2010
I don't remember who said it and I will probably misquote it, but it said that a truly educated mind will be able to listen to all points of view and not lose his temper or his faith.
I like the article. I agree with a LOT of the article. The problem we run into, though, is that we tend to judge ourselves on our intentions and others on their actions. Despite the fact that he is a public figure we need to be careful we don't judge him on a different level than we judge ourselves.
Actions do speak louder than words, but not nearly often enough! (Mark Twain)
I like the article. I agree with a LOT of the article. The problem we run into, though, is that we tend to judge ourselves on our intentions and others on their actions. Despite the fact that he is a public figure we need to be careful we don't judge him on a different level than we judge ourselves.
Actions do speak louder than words, but not nearly often enough! (Mark Twain)
-
- +0
-
-
written by Spuds, January 28, 2010
And if we are going to base our disagreement with the Admin's policy based on hyperbole and manufactured hysteria then we need to put the Bush-tastic duo under the same magnifying gla*s... "Mission Accomplished", "Weapons of Ma*s Destruction", "Axis of Evil"... politics is politics and you can't confuse a politician's principles with his propaganda. We need a complete reversal of how the halls of power are run in Washington. At this point it is less about the "power of the people" and more about "preservation of power".
-
- +0
-
-
written by Spiny Norman, January 28, 2010
That is why I am now and forever not affiliated with either party.
When people resort to personal attacks that is just a clear sign to all that they have nothing more useful to say (Yes Limbaugh and Olberman, I am talking to you).
Partisan politics, more than simply Bush or Obama has the greatest potential to wreck this country.I'm sure you all have heard of George Washington right?
Well...here is his take on party politics...
Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind, (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight,) the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it. - G. Washington
When people resort to personal attacks that is just a clear sign to all that they have nothing more useful to say (Yes Limbaugh and Olberman, I am talking to you).
Partisan politics, more than simply Bush or Obama has the greatest potential to wreck this country.I'm sure you all have heard of George Washington right?
Well...here is his take on party politics...
Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind, (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight,) the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it. - G. Washington
-
- +0
-
-
written by Russ, January 28, 2010
Mr. Man, you are a stronger man than I. I couldn't listen to him prattle on for an hour plus. I needed to clip my toenails. (For the record, I couldn't listen to W either.)
-
- +0
-
-
written by eyesofbabes, January 28, 2010
Mr. Man, One reason I am not religious - much like the bible, words can be spun both ways and interpreted in a million ways as you so eloquently prove. I do give you credit for your important statement about support and hope for success.
Obviously we have quite a different take on how Obama governs and the incredible concessions he has made.
But, I will admit, last night after work I was exhausted so I figured I'd watch the speech on the Internet at a later time. Now, I am at work again and can't do it. (Have to pay those huge health bills, you know) So, I will save my Democratic response for a future post and continue with the spirit of these comments.
Actually, I think I'll write a few posts about parenting first ;-)
By the way, @Spuds, I agree. Well said.
Obviously we have quite a different take on how Obama governs and the incredible concessions he has made.
But, I will admit, last night after work I was exhausted so I figured I'd watch the speech on the Internet at a later time. Now, I am at work again and can't do it. (Have to pay those huge health bills, you know) So, I will save my Democratic response for a future post and continue with the spirit of these comments.
Actually, I think I'll write a few posts about parenting first ;-)
By the way, @Spuds, I agree. Well said.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Zerzix, January 28, 2010
Lately I have been staying out of the political discussions. Especially after the major flaming I got last time I stated my opinion on one topic.
I have to agree with both of the most recent posts here by Mr. Man and Steelydad. Our current president continues to remind me of the High school Student counsel elections where promises are made that we all know can not be kept. As Mr. Obama moves forward with his agenda, the American people’s voice is beginning to be heard by Congress, if not by the president himself.
Now that the Democrat Super majority is broken I can not see many of the political strides Mr. Obama wants to make coming to pa*s.
The fact that his administration still pa*ses blame to the previous administration is a point that further make me wonder if he has the know how to do him appointed job. Yes, he has the derrick, the speech giving skills, and he has the skills needed to sway large ma*ses of under educated people. What he is lacking is the ability to follow through on his plans and promises. The president, by himself, has no true power in our government. He depends on Congress to do what he wants, but he can not force them to vote one way or the other on anything.
Many people may need to go back to Government cla*s where the constitutional powers of the President and Congress are explained. There is a reason federal legislation take a long time to pa*s, it affects millions of people across the country. If you want something to happen faster, try and get is pa*sed at your state level. If we put more trust in our states to take care of some of these things we would not be affecting the National Deficit with Issues that are not truly national issues.
To save myself form the backlash of Dadfiles and others I think I will just stop my rant here.
I have to agree with both of the most recent posts here by Mr. Man and Steelydad. Our current president continues to remind me of the High school Student counsel elections where promises are made that we all know can not be kept. As Mr. Obama moves forward with his agenda, the American people’s voice is beginning to be heard by Congress, if not by the president himself.
Now that the Democrat Super majority is broken I can not see many of the political strides Mr. Obama wants to make coming to pa*s.
The fact that his administration still pa*ses blame to the previous administration is a point that further make me wonder if he has the know how to do him appointed job. Yes, he has the derrick, the speech giving skills, and he has the skills needed to sway large ma*ses of under educated people. What he is lacking is the ability to follow through on his plans and promises. The president, by himself, has no true power in our government. He depends on Congress to do what he wants, but he can not force them to vote one way or the other on anything.
Many people may need to go back to Government cla*s where the constitutional powers of the President and Congress are explained. There is a reason federal legislation take a long time to pa*s, it affects millions of people across the country. If you want something to happen faster, try and get is pa*sed at your state level. If we put more trust in our states to take care of some of these things we would not be affecting the National Deficit with Issues that are not truly national issues.
To save myself form the backlash of Dadfiles and others I think I will just stop my rant here.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Mitch c*mstein, January 28, 2010
Been reading the last couple of political posts with great interest.
First of all, the last eight years have to be mentioned. Why? Because they're the reason we're in this mess. It's important to understand that GWB started his presidency with a surplus and balanced budget. He ended it in financial ruin and a bailout for all of his greedy corporate buddies. So how exactly is what Obama said "a bunch of BS?" It's all completely factual and also pertinent. And while we're at it, why is anyone surprised the national debt went up under Obama. If you think about it, it had to go up. The Stimulus funds are the reason the economy isn't even worse, but the money had to be spent to make it happen.
But most importantly, people are expecting a miracle in too short a time. It's only been a year. Obama's done some positive things and he's stumbled. Did anyone (even Obama's staunch supporters) really think he wasn't going to make mistakes? But unlike GWB, his mistakes haven't ended in wars or completely ignoring an entire region after a natural disaster.
To your point about taking so long to increase the troop level in Afghanistan, are you kidding? I'm thrilled he took his time and reasoned things out. And if you've been paying any attention at all, even newly appointed GOP hero Scott Brown praised Obama for taking his time and due diligence before making a decision about Afghanistan. I'd rather our president take that route as opposed to, you know, skirting Congress to start a war despite the lack of any WMDs.
And it's pretty amusing to hear people talk about how the President should reach out to the other side of the aisle. Yet no one mentions the fact that the GOP band together and never make a bipartisan vote. I guess compromise should only be made by one side right?
Now, as to some of the comments:
First of all, disagreement is a great thing. Makes the world go round. But make no mistake, there is venom. But to be fair, it's venom from both sides. Liberals hated Bush with a pa*sion, just as conservatives can't even thinly disguise their utter hatred of all things Obama. But the difference is liberals had eight years of evidence and some extremely solid reasons for despising Bush. It went well beyond ideological differences. However, the criticisms and attacks on Obama began even before he took office.
The comments in this thread were pretty tame compared to the last one, which is good to see. But Zerzix, did you take a good look at what you wrote? You want to "save yourself form (sic) the backlash of Dadfiles and others," yet you write things like "he has the skills to sway large ma*ses of under educated people." Seriously man? You just called all Obama supporters dumb. And then comes the hypocrisy of saying you're wary of retaliation from others? Yikes.
Anyways, good stuff and quality discussion. Looking forward to more.
First of all, the last eight years have to be mentioned. Why? Because they're the reason we're in this mess. It's important to understand that GWB started his presidency with a surplus and balanced budget. He ended it in financial ruin and a bailout for all of his greedy corporate buddies. So how exactly is what Obama said "a bunch of BS?" It's all completely factual and also pertinent. And while we're at it, why is anyone surprised the national debt went up under Obama. If you think about it, it had to go up. The Stimulus funds are the reason the economy isn't even worse, but the money had to be spent to make it happen.
But most importantly, people are expecting a miracle in too short a time. It's only been a year. Obama's done some positive things and he's stumbled. Did anyone (even Obama's staunch supporters) really think he wasn't going to make mistakes? But unlike GWB, his mistakes haven't ended in wars or completely ignoring an entire region after a natural disaster.
To your point about taking so long to increase the troop level in Afghanistan, are you kidding? I'm thrilled he took his time and reasoned things out. And if you've been paying any attention at all, even newly appointed GOP hero Scott Brown praised Obama for taking his time and due diligence before making a decision about Afghanistan. I'd rather our president take that route as opposed to, you know, skirting Congress to start a war despite the lack of any WMDs.
And it's pretty amusing to hear people talk about how the President should reach out to the other side of the aisle. Yet no one mentions the fact that the GOP band together and never make a bipartisan vote. I guess compromise should only be made by one side right?
Now, as to some of the comments:
First of all, disagreement is a great thing. Makes the world go round. But make no mistake, there is venom. But to be fair, it's venom from both sides. Liberals hated Bush with a pa*sion, just as conservatives can't even thinly disguise their utter hatred of all things Obama. But the difference is liberals had eight years of evidence and some extremely solid reasons for despising Bush. It went well beyond ideological differences. However, the criticisms and attacks on Obama began even before he took office.
The comments in this thread were pretty tame compared to the last one, which is good to see. But Zerzix, did you take a good look at what you wrote? You want to "save yourself form (sic) the backlash of Dadfiles and others," yet you write things like "he has the skills to sway large ma*ses of under educated people." Seriously man? You just called all Obama supporters dumb. And then comes the hypocrisy of saying you're wary of retaliation from others? Yikes.
Anyways, good stuff and quality discussion. Looking forward to more.
-
- +0
-
-
written by DaddyKV, January 28, 2010
I think at this point no matter what side we the people need to take back OUR government and vote people in that will do the will of the people and not personal agendas.
I am excited to see if a voter revolution will happen in November.
When 60% some odd percent do not agree with the current Health Care bill that should send a message that its not needed. What makes the people on the hill smarter then me and how do they know whats best for ME. They don't. Vote by your constituents and not for personal gains.
DF and Bella don't leave the conversation who will I disagree with now
I am excited to see if a voter revolution will happen in November.
When 60% some odd percent do not agree with the current Health Care bill that should send a message that its not needed. What makes the people on the hill smarter then me and how do they know whats best for ME. They don't. Vote by your constituents and not for personal gains.
DF and Bella don't leave the conversation who will I disagree with now
-
- +0
-
-
written by Spuds, January 28, 2010
Obama took his time in sending more troops to Afghanistan and men died because of the delay. I know this first hand. I am hoping that the presentation of the n*bel Peace Prize didn't unduly sway his decision to wait, but the request for additional troops was made, not as a political ploy, but as a pressing matter of security for our troops on the ground. It's easy for politicos, such as Brown, to play the political game and agree with the decision, but for those troops in the Northern Mountains of Afghanistan it was not a game.
Going to Iraq may have been the wrong decision, when based on the notion of finding WMD's. That's a gimme! We could have at least have "shot the bird" at the war for oil protesters and actually USED the oil! Since when did the Bushes worry so much about world opinion? Maybe we should invade Northern Mexico in search of WMD's! It would be easier to make the case for National Security reasons and we could invade just far enough to take over the northern oil fields only THIS TIME benefit from the gains!
Not only would we gain the oil, but we'd take care of the drug wars just outside and inside our borders... A TWO-FER!
The economy is a mess, granted. And Obama did inherit quite the sinking ship. But the problem Bush was running into and the mistake that Obama is continuing to make is that you can't overcapitalize a sinking economy. Am I the only person who has read Adam Smith? It's like scooping the water from the bilge decks of the ship and dumping it in the top luxury decks of the ship rather than throwing it overboard. How does THAT help?
It gets the guy in the three piece suit all wet, but the ship still sinks. Or is it just to provide the illusion of doing something?
It's going to be interesting to see how the banks unload the "monopoly money" they have padded their books with for the past year. Even with hyped up GDP numbers the banks are at least 120% over capitalized! If they unload all of that funny money we will be paying $7 per gallon for milk by the 4th of July.
It's a pile of... it's a conundrum, to be sure!
Going to Iraq may have been the wrong decision, when based on the notion of finding WMD's. That's a gimme! We could have at least have "shot the bird" at the war for oil protesters and actually USED the oil! Since when did the Bushes worry so much about world opinion? Maybe we should invade Northern Mexico in search of WMD's! It would be easier to make the case for National Security reasons and we could invade just far enough to take over the northern oil fields only THIS TIME benefit from the gains!
Not only would we gain the oil, but we'd take care of the drug wars just outside and inside our borders... A TWO-FER!
The economy is a mess, granted. And Obama did inherit quite the sinking ship. But the problem Bush was running into and the mistake that Obama is continuing to make is that you can't overcapitalize a sinking economy. Am I the only person who has read Adam Smith? It's like scooping the water from the bilge decks of the ship and dumping it in the top luxury decks of the ship rather than throwing it overboard. How does THAT help?
It gets the guy in the three piece suit all wet, but the ship still sinks. Or is it just to provide the illusion of doing something?
It's going to be interesting to see how the banks unload the "monopoly money" they have padded their books with for the past year. Even with hyped up GDP numbers the banks are at least 120% over capitalized! If they unload all of that funny money we will be paying $7 per gallon for milk by the 4th of July.
It's a pile of... it's a conundrum, to be sure!
-
- +0
-
-
written by Mitch c*mstein, January 29, 2010
Spuds: I won't try to pretend I know what the conditions are like in Afghanistan. You've been there, I haven't. I defer to you on that. But although I generally agree with the rest of your comments, I just can't agree with you that Obama taking his time was a bad thing.
Troops were sent into Iraq under the radar and under false pretenses. But even worse, they were sent in without an exit strategy. Obama met with his war council something like 10 times over two months because he didn't want to endanger the lives of 30,000 more soldiers without being damn sure about what he was doing. Did the endanger the lives of soldiers already in the ground in Afghanistan? Unfortunately, it most likely did. Although it's hard to say because stepping on an IED may not be preventable just because more troops are there. But either way, I get your point and acknowledge it as a fairly valid one. But endangering 30,000 additional troops by sending them in without a proper plan in place is not a viable solution.
And your point about Scott Brown really doesn't hold water because he's a Lt. Colonel in the National Guard himself. The man won a U.S. Senate seat by going head-to-head with Obama, so why on Earth would he "play the political game?" It didn't behoove him at all to agree with Democrats on anything, yet he did because he said it represented sound decision-making. And I agree.
DaddyKV: The problem with saying things like "take back OUR government" is that everyone has different ideas of what our government should be. Are you saying politicians should always and automatically bow to the majority of their constituents? That's absurd. If you want a government where everything is left up to a popular vote and majority rules, then why even bother to have politicians in the first place. Personally, I want someone who will stand up for what he believes in, even when it's not popular. And if the people want to go in a different direction, they'll elect someone else when the time comes.
Troops were sent into Iraq under the radar and under false pretenses. But even worse, they were sent in without an exit strategy. Obama met with his war council something like 10 times over two months because he didn't want to endanger the lives of 30,000 more soldiers without being damn sure about what he was doing. Did the endanger the lives of soldiers already in the ground in Afghanistan? Unfortunately, it most likely did. Although it's hard to say because stepping on an IED may not be preventable just because more troops are there. But either way, I get your point and acknowledge it as a fairly valid one. But endangering 30,000 additional troops by sending them in without a proper plan in place is not a viable solution.
And your point about Scott Brown really doesn't hold water because he's a Lt. Colonel in the National Guard himself. The man won a U.S. Senate seat by going head-to-head with Obama, so why on Earth would he "play the political game?" It didn't behoove him at all to agree with Democrats on anything, yet he did because he said it represented sound decision-making. And I agree.
DaddyKV: The problem with saying things like "take back OUR government" is that everyone has different ideas of what our government should be. Are you saying politicians should always and automatically bow to the majority of their constituents? That's absurd. If you want a government where everything is left up to a popular vote and majority rules, then why even bother to have politicians in the first place. Personally, I want someone who will stand up for what he believes in, even when it's not popular. And if the people want to go in a different direction, they'll elect someone else when the time comes.
-
- +0
-
-
written by DaddyKV, January 29, 2010
@Mitch c*mstein
I agree with you that popular vote should not run the country. I also agree that if I vote a person to office its because I agree with how he/she thinks and I have given them the power to represent me in House/Senate or other political position. It is therefore their DUTY to represent ME.
If during their run as a politician they do not vote or represent ME in the way I would like. I will hold them accountable by voting for someone else.
The problem I see is there is no accountability because we have been blinded by party lines, sweet talkers, and populous ignorance. Your statement "And if the people want to go in a different direction, they'll elect someone else when the time comes. " is what SHOULD happen, but never does.
It sickens me that turn out for elections is as low as it is. How can someone choose not to voice their opinion? What is even worse is the people that don't vote but still complain. Not to be rude ..but if you don't vote... you have not right to talk about politics.
Accountability for politicians is the problem. Period.
I agree with you that popular vote should not run the country. I also agree that if I vote a person to office its because I agree with how he/she thinks and I have given them the power to represent me in House/Senate or other political position. It is therefore their DUTY to represent ME.
If during their run as a politician they do not vote or represent ME in the way I would like. I will hold them accountable by voting for someone else.
The problem I see is there is no accountability because we have been blinded by party lines, sweet talkers, and populous ignorance. Your statement "And if the people want to go in a different direction, they'll elect someone else when the time comes. " is what SHOULD happen, but never does.
It sickens me that turn out for elections is as low as it is. How can someone choose not to voice their opinion? What is even worse is the people that don't vote but still complain. Not to be rude ..but if you don't vote... you have not right to talk about politics.
Accountability for politicians is the problem. Period.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Mitch c*mstein, January 29, 2010
Amen to that.
Look at the most recent Senate election in Ma*s. The statewide average was around 50% of registered voters who turned out. Yet people were celebrating this number like it was some major accomplishment. But it's not. It's half. HALF!!! Only half the people came out to decide the future. That, in and of itself, is shameful.
And yes, the people who don't vote and then complain are the worst. Wouldn't it be great if all voting records were made public so we could confirm whether or not Joe Schmo voted before he/she started talking all this crap on a blog/TV show/letter to the editor? That would be a good day.
Look at the most recent Senate election in Ma*s. The statewide average was around 50% of registered voters who turned out. Yet people were celebrating this number like it was some major accomplishment. But it's not. It's half. HALF!!! Only half the people came out to decide the future. That, in and of itself, is shameful.
And yes, the people who don't vote and then complain are the worst. Wouldn't it be great if all voting records were made public so we could confirm whether or not Joe Schmo voted before he/she started talking all this crap on a blog/TV show/letter to the editor? That would be a good day.
-
- +0
-
-
written by eyesofbabes, January 29, 2010
@ Mitch c*mstein. Thank you for your well thought out and sensible remarks. I was thinking that since DF and Bella are quiet, I may have few others to agree with. Also, thank you for pointing out the hypocrisy in certain personal attacks.
By the way, DaddyKV - DF and Bella might be quiet but I am still here. I know I don’t visit too often and my spelling is atrocious but I’ll put in my liberal progressive viewpoints every once in a while.
By the way, DaddyKV - DF and Bella might be quiet but I am still here. I know I don’t visit too often and my spelling is atrocious but I’ll put in my liberal progressive viewpoints every once in a while.
-
- +0
-
-
written by eyesofbabes, January 29, 2010
@DaddyKV, while we're quoting polls, I will re-post a quote I put in another comment section regarding the health plan.
Rasmussen poll: While most Americans oppose the plan, two reforms in it are supported by more than 70% of the public -- creating a new national insurance exchange and requiring health insurance companies to accept applicants with pre-existing conditions. – The main things the democrats and the people really wanted.
Rasmussen poll: While most Americans oppose the plan, two reforms in it are supported by more than 70% of the public -- creating a new national insurance exchange and requiring health insurance companies to accept applicants with pre-existing conditions. – The main things the democrats and the people really wanted.
-
- +0
-
-
written by BellaDaddy, January 29, 2010
@All, I am still here, watching, waiting, biting my lip LOL...apologies if I started anything and refuse to finish...just trying to look for the good now...not wanting to lose myself in debating my thoughts and feelings...
Food For Thought...even when we elect, we are never guaranteed anything...case in point, our own Senator...Mr. John McCain, while basking in the national spotlight, bashing the "other side" does nothing to a*sist our state...nada...(oh, we received federal stimulus monies - but it went to departments other than first responers for our state) Just yesterday, announcements made, 300 on our police force are being laid off...in the second worst crime ridden city in the nation...worried? U bet I am, as the "other" announcement made was that Sarah Palin was going to campaign for JMc's re-election...here, in our state....Seriously? with all that is going on here!! WHO CARES! It has nada to do with my political preferences, but everything to do with our well being...I have a young child to protect...and now...well, go figure, it wont be any easier...so you see, for me, debating, name calling politics here is useless for me as a Dad...it only causes more anguish for all involved, and I prefer to consider myself one of the "Nice Guys" and my opinions and thoughts, neutral......it really bothered me that any of my statements would be considered a personal attack...was never my intention!
Food For Thought...even when we elect, we are never guaranteed anything...case in point, our own Senator...Mr. John McCain, while basking in the national spotlight, bashing the "other side" does nothing to a*sist our state...nada...(oh, we received federal stimulus monies - but it went to departments other than first responers for our state) Just yesterday, announcements made, 300 on our police force are being laid off...in the second worst crime ridden city in the nation...worried? U bet I am, as the "other" announcement made was that Sarah Palin was going to campaign for JMc's re-election...here, in our state....Seriously? with all that is going on here!! WHO CARES! It has nada to do with my political preferences, but everything to do with our well being...I have a young child to protect...and now...well, go figure, it wont be any easier...so you see, for me, debating, name calling politics here is useless for me as a Dad...it only causes more anguish for all involved, and I prefer to consider myself one of the "Nice Guys" and my opinions and thoughts, neutral......it really bothered me that any of my statements would be considered a personal attack...was never my intention!
-
- +0
-
-
written by DaddyKV, January 29, 2010
Eyesofbabe I agree with you in that there are some good things that would benefit all in the health care bill, pre-existing conditions being one of them. However in order for people to have health care with pre-existing conditions we must accept the 95% of the other crap in the bill then I am not for it.
I realize that its about compromise to get what you want, in and of itself that's a very important part of politics. But at the same time how much crap can you accept before you say enough is enough and start over.
Just because a bill has one or two good point does not make it a good bill.
I realize that its about compromise to get what you want, in and of itself that's a very important part of politics. But at the same time how much crap can you accept before you say enough is enough and start over.
Just because a bill has one or two good point does not make it a good bill.
-
- +0
-
-
written by eyesofbabes, February 02, 2010
DaddyKV - good points. The bill has many bad things as well. But, I am not really convinced Republicans really want to start over or just delay until we are left with the status quo. Yes, they made some proposals but they are going back and forth on whether they will actually submit a bill and, either way, their proposals are not what I believe we need and what the American people need or want. Unfortunately, it doesn’t look like we will get that anytime soon and many will continue to suffer because of it.
@Bella, if I implied you made personal attacks, I didn’t mean to.
@Bella, if I implied you made personal attacks, I didn’t mean to.
-
- +0
-
-
written by BellaDaddy, February 02, 2010
@eyesofbabes...please, no worries...your very cool in my book...and if I gave the impression you did, apologies...certainly not my intent ;-)
-
- +0
-
-
written by CharliePATpk, February 18, 2010
I've been out of circulation for some time, so my response here is far behind the others.
A few points of fact:
- No president can sign a spending bill unless the Congress passes one first
- For the last 2 years of President Bush's term, Democrats had the majority in Congress
- in 2007, Rep Nancy Pelosi said if Dems were elected to the House, American's would again the price per gallon of gas fall to $2 or less.
- Senator Obama voted on the budget and the TARP bills that Pres. Bush signed -- the very same 'mess' he continues to harp on
- President Bush and the largely-GOP controlled Congress did spend... most Conservatives called them 'Democrat-lite'. Still, in one year President Obama (and the Democrats in Congress) raised the deficit 4x as much as President Bush did in 8 years.
- The election results in Virginia, New Jersey, Massachusetts foretell a greater shift of power in 2010 that anyone would typically expect in a midterm election.
- I can't wait!
A few points of fact:
- No president can sign a spending bill unless the Congress passes one first
- For the last 2 years of President Bush's term, Democrats had the majority in Congress
- in 2007, Rep Nancy Pelosi said if Dems were elected to the House, American's would again the price per gallon of gas fall to $2 or less.
- Senator Obama voted on the budget and the TARP bills that Pres. Bush signed -- the very same 'mess' he continues to harp on
- President Bush and the largely-GOP controlled Congress did spend... most Conservatives called them 'Democrat-lite'. Still, in one year President Obama (and the Democrats in Congress) raised the deficit 4x as much as President Bush did in 8 years.
- The election results in Virginia, New Jersey, Massachusetts foretell a greater shift of power in 2010 that anyone would typically expect in a midterm election.
- I can't wait!
-
- +0
-
-
Write a comment
I'm gonna have to make a super-secret screenname with which I come on DB just to argue politics because I'm not sure I can sit idly by and not refute some of these claims you're making!! That having been said, I'm curious what some of the other more liberal minded dads on here with respond with.