PDA

View Full Version : Talking bad about the presiden / critisize?


atomdanger
04-18-2009, 09:27 PM
This was mentioned in another thread,
but I wanted to talk about it in its own thread so the other didn't get off track.

Do you think its ok to point out things the president does wrong?
Or to criticize him?

I do.
I think its completely fair to talk about, point out and discuss things we thing our leader is doing right or wrong.
He works for us, period.
We don't work for him, he is an employee of American citizens in my eyes,
and I feel like we have the right to discuss how he is doing, our opinions etc...

rockdawg21
04-18-2009, 10:00 PM
Absolutely, he works for U.S. "US". If he does something good, such as, giving money to education, I'll give him credit for that, I already have. But most of the stuff the guy does just doesn't fly with me. I'm sure he's a nice guy, I don't know him, so I won't say anything bad about him, but I'll criticize his ideology and policies.

medic92
04-18-2009, 10:43 PM
The hard part is differentiating between personal attacks on the president and legitimate disagreement with his policies.

Personally, I believe Obama is like a carnival barker. All talk with no substance. He's a good showman but stumbles badly when taken off his carefully prepared and coached talking points and scripts.

I also disagree with almost all his policies, programs and political stances, but I'm compelled to respect him as our president. I didn't vote for him and don't particularly like the fact that he's the president, but he deserves the respect that comes with the office. You'll never hear me claim "he's not MY president" like the left did for eight years of Bush's presidency.

J.B.
04-18-2009, 11:02 PM
The hard part is differentiating between personal attacks on the president and legitimate disagreement with his policies.

Personally, I believe Obama is like a carnival barker. All talk with no substance. He's a good showman but stumbles badly when taken off his carefully prepared and coached talking points and scripts.

I also disagree with almost all his policies, programs and political stances, but I'm compelled to respect him as our president. I didn't vote for him and don't particularly like the fact that he's the president, but he deserves the respect that comes with the office. You'll never hear me claim "he's not MY president" like the left did for eight years of Bush's presidency.

QFT :)

KENTUCKYREDBONE
04-20-2009, 12:01 AM
What bugs me is this myth that you can't disagree with Obama without being Racist!

Bonnie
04-20-2009, 12:15 AM
What bugs me is this myth that you can't disagree with Obama without being Racist!

Are you saying that if you disagree with him it's a "myth" that they (Obama supporters) call you racist?

Because that did happen during the campaign if anyone said anything against him.

Tyburn
04-20-2009, 01:20 AM
This was mentioned in another thread,
but I wanted to talk about it in its own thread so the other didn't get off track.

Do you think its ok to point out things the president does wrong?
Or to criticize him?

I do.
I think its completely fair to talk about, point out and discuss things we thing our leader is doing right or wrong.
He works for us, period.
We don't work for him, he is an employee of American citizens in my eyes,
and I feel like we have the right to discuss how he is doing, our opinions etc...
I think its alright to discuss any political or famous person

It doesnt matter who he works for.

rockdawg21
04-20-2009, 02:28 AM
What bugs me is this myth that you can't disagree with Obama without being Racist!
Just say the only side you're referring to is the white side and you're in the clear. Just use the words honky and cracker when you're describing him. It's self-racism, therefore, it can't be racist. It's like when blacks call each other "n*****". :)

NateR
04-20-2009, 05:00 AM
What bugs me is this myth that you can't disagree with Obama without being Racist!

Unless, they are just mentally-defective morons, then I don't think that even the people making those accusations believe that for a minute. Unfortunately, it's proven to be the quickest way to shut up those who disagree with Obama.

I give a year or so more and eventually the word will just lose its meaning and people will stop caring if they're considered racists. Once the name calling stops being effective, then the liberals will lose all of their power.

logrus
04-20-2009, 06:16 AM
Just say the only side you're referring to is the white side and you're in the clear. Just use the words honky and cracker when you're describing him. It's self-racism, therefore, it can't be racist. It's like when blacks call each other "n*****". :)

Actually I don't use the word NI******, I use the word Neger. which means dark skinned. The word originated back when the Portuguese occupied Latin America, since the natives were all darker in skin colour.

ANyways I don't see how we can have a Obama section in the forums, but all the Mods cried like little girls when I made any comment about Bushs handling about any situation.

NateR
04-20-2009, 07:08 AM
ANyways I don't see how we can have a Obama section in the forums, but all the Mods cried like little girls when I made any comment about Bushs handling about any situation.

:rolleyes: Are you trying to immulate your buddy Joe Biden by being a "serial exaggerator?" Of course, if I wasn't being so generous right now, I'd just call you a liar.:tongue0011: There is absolutely nothing truthful in your memory of our past discussions. Ah well, at least you're true to form with every other liberal in America.:laugh:

atomdanger
04-20-2009, 05:51 PM
Unless, they are just mentally-defective morons, then I don't think that even the people making those accusations believe that for a minute. Unfortunately, it's proven to be the quickest way to shut up those who disagree with Obama.

I give a year or so more and eventually the word will just lose its meaning and people will stop caring if they're considered racists. Once the name calling stops being effective, then the liberals will lose all of their power.

True,
at this point nobody wants to be branded as racist, so its an effective tool

atomdanger
04-20-2009, 05:53 PM
Actually I don't use the word NI******, I use the word Neger. which means dark skinned. The word originated back when the Portuguese occupied Latin America, since the natives were all darker in skin colour.

ANyways I don't see how we can have a Obama section in the forums, but all the Mods cried like little girls when I made any comment about Bushs handling about any situation.

Really?

I feel like I did a fair share of Bush bashing (that just sounds wrong.... or right) before Obama was elected and didn't get much crap.

Llamafighter
04-20-2009, 05:59 PM
Really?

I feel like I did a fair share of Bush bashing (that just sounds wrong.... or right) before Obama was elected and didn't get much crap.

Ditto. I just ignore the anti Obama stuff for the most part. I'm not going to change anyone's opinion, and likewise. We have the luxury of being able to criticize our leaders in this great country of ours.
The only thing I won't go for is name calling. Respectful criticism is one thing, even some fun jabs and whatnot.

logrus
04-20-2009, 06:45 PM
:rolleyes: Are you trying to immulate your buddy Joe Biden by being a "serial exaggerator?" Of course, if I wasn't being so generous right now, I'd just call you a liar.:tongue0011: There is absolutely nothing truthful in your memory of our past discussions. Ah well, at least you're true to form with every other liberal in America.:laugh:


You got it partially right. I am actually a clone of both Biden and Obama, I love to exaggerate and my ideas are so far fetched that people actually believe me when I talk.

ufcfan2
04-20-2009, 07:13 PM
I think its almost a civic duty to question the authorities of local,state,and Presidental powers. If u don't question or ask why,then u start to lose what made US what it is,a democracy. I think we've let the Presidents,CEO's off the hook for way too long. I think we have our priorities way out of sink and we have every right to question why.
I agree you have draw a line between a personal and a professional attack on anyone. I'm not so into politics to what proper channels to take to voice my opinions(maybe some peeps can post stuff like that). I think the lines of communication from Joe public to President is skewed that we can't communicate other than protests/demostrations.
I would like to see more 'Community Debates' from the President/Vice President. IF the President(any,Rep/Dem) really cared what the people think,he would do these every month.
I voted Obama,but I don't agree with everything he did/doing/or gonna do. I just voted for the lesser of two evils. Will Obama be a great as his speeches,NO,will he be worse than Bush,I hope not though only time will tell.
No matter if u voted for him or not,ya gotta back him and hope he can get the country at least rolling in the right direction...:unsure:

Miss Foxy
04-20-2009, 07:33 PM
The hard part is differentiating between personal attacks on the president and legitimate disagreement with his policies.

Personally, I believe Obama is like a carnival barker. All talk with no substance. He's a good showman but stumbles badly when taken off his carefully prepared and coached talking points and scripts.

I also disagree with almost all his policies, programs and political stances, but I'm compelled to respect him as our president. I didn't vote for him and don't particularly like the fact that he's the president, but he deserves the respect that comes with the office. You'll never hear me claim "he's not MY president" like the left did for eight years of Bush's presidency.
I agree with you.. However I dunno about the left comment...:wink: In all fairness though your right.

rearnakedchoke
04-20-2009, 07:37 PM
I agree with you.. However I dunno about the left comment...:wink: In all fairness though your right.
No pun intended ......

Miss Foxy
04-20-2009, 07:41 PM
No pun intended ......
?

CAVEMAN
04-20-2009, 08:18 PM
I believe it was Thomas Paine who said that government is a necessary evil...which I agree with 100%. A democracy is about the people and we have every right to question the government and criticize if need be. In the last 20 years government has grown larger and larger and interferes more and more in the lives of people, especially the majority. So yes I believe we have a right and duty to keep our government in check. Especially now! If we don't, we will lose the right!

Tyburn
04-20-2009, 09:21 PM
?
:laugh:

you know..."right" as in not left wing :happydancing:

Miss Foxy
04-20-2009, 09:24 PM
:laugh:

you know..."right" as in not left wing :happydancing:
I know what what left and right wing are Dave. I was questioning his comment.

Tyburn
04-20-2009, 11:51 PM
I know what what left and right wing are Dave. I was questioning his comment.
He said pun intended....you were talking about someone being correct, and you used the word "right" in the middle of a debate about left and right.

you might not have realized...but that was witty.

you know...pun intended...except I dont think you meant to do it...but never mind :rolleyes:

CAVEMAN
04-22-2009, 05:10 PM
I'm not much of a Glenn Beck fan, but this vid is good!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8kLaEuAoxg

NateR
04-22-2009, 05:23 PM
I'm not much of a Glenn Beck fan, but this vid is good!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8kLaEuAoxg

I'm a big fan of Glenn Beck and that's a great video.

One of the biggest problems I see is that the media has brainwashed the majority of people into thinking that the last 8 years under George W. Bush were soooooooo horrible that anything is better by comparison. That's simply not the truth, Bush was a great President and I know that history will vindicate him from the lies of the liberal media.

Of course, "waterboarding" is the big anti-Bush talking point this week; but I have a hard time believing that waterboarding is torture in the true sense of the word.

CAVEMAN
04-22-2009, 05:47 PM
I'm a big fan of Glenn Beck and that's a great video.

One of the biggest problems I see is that the media has brainwashed the majority of people into thinking that the last 8 years under George W. Bush were soooooooo horrible that anything is better by comparison. That's simply not the truth, Bush was a great President and I know that history will vindicate him from the lies of the liberal media.

Of course, "waterboarding" is the big anti-Bush talking point this week; but I have a hard time believing that waterboarding is torture in the true sense of the word.

I do agree with Glenn on a lot of things, I just think sometimes he can be a "dooms day" type person. I also agree that the media has played a huge role in demonizing GWB and glorifying Obama and Obamunism!:laugh:

And let's see....our interrogators used waterboarding, which does not kill a person, but did get them to talk. And then you have Al Qaeda who did not use any interrogation but just simply cut the person/persons head off. But, you don't see much of that on TV any more, do you?

At the moment, the media is enjoying this "flash in the pan" liberal governement. But just like the video, I hope the people of this country see around the media twist, wake up, and start to realize just where this administration is taking this country!

rockdawg21
04-22-2009, 05:50 PM
LOL @ Obamunism! Good one!

I've been calling his election an Obamanation. :rotfl:

County Mike
04-22-2009, 05:53 PM
I know what what left and right wing are Dave. I was questioning his comment.

I know what right and left wing are too. They're two of the forwards on a hockey line. The other one is the center.

DUH!

Buzzard
04-22-2009, 08:42 PM
I'm a big fan of Glenn Beck and that's a great video.

One of the biggest problems I see is that the media has brainwashed the majority of people into thinking that the last 8 years under George W. Bush were soooooooo horrible that anything is better by comparison. That's simply not the truth, Bush was a great President and I know that history will vindicate him from the lies of the liberal media.

Of course, "waterboarding" is the big anti-Bush talking point this week; but I have a hard time believing that waterboarding is torture in the true sense of the word.

What is your definition of torture?

Here is an article for all to read. It comes from an Iraqi interrogator.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/28/AR2008112802242.html

Why is it that the United States tried and convicted someone for the crime of waterboarding in WW2, yet when we do it it isn't a crime? I posted the link in an earlier thread, or possibly this thread.

The media hasn't brainwashed all, and Bush was far from a great president. You just refuse to take off your rose colored glasses when looking at him.


Here is a nicely summarized list of some of W's worst moments in his presidency.


You may agree, you may not.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/4228722/George-Bushs-20-worst-moments.html

Crisco
04-22-2009, 08:50 PM
Waterboard them all.

They are lucky I wasn't guarding the dude who planned 911 I would have used gasoline.

Tyburn
04-22-2009, 08:51 PM
Waterboard them all.

They are lucky I wasn't guarding the dude who planned 911 I would have used gasoline.
...and a match :huh:

Crisco
04-22-2009, 08:54 PM
...and a match :huh:

I don't think I would have to I think it would probably kill him from the fumes... IF not he would be very uncomfortable because of the burns.

Tyburn
04-22-2009, 08:56 PM
I don't think I would have to I think it would probably kill him from the fumes... IF not he would be very uncomfortable because of the burns.
well...if you got to violent...a little spark would set the whole place a light

Do you mean waterbaording with gasoline?? or do you mean useing gasoline to keep someone awake during torture?? Didnt they use to pour gasoline into the eyes of people on the rack to stop them blacking out from the pain...?? or is that something else :unsure-1: :huh:

NateR
04-22-2009, 09:16 PM
Here is a nicely summarized list of some of W's worst moments in his presidency.


You may agree, you may not.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/4228722/George-Bushs-20-worst-moments.html

It's nice that you chose such an "unbiased" website for your "evidence.":rolleyes: However I disagree with most of these "worst moments." In fact, many of those, primarily limiting stem cell research and abandoning the Kyoto protocol, I believe that President Bush should be commended for. I'm against embryonic stem cell research and I don't think we need to be putting ourselves under the thumb of the UN for this myth called "global warming."

I also believe that the tax cuts for the wealthy are a good thing and I disagree that it ties in with the economic crash at all.

Also, they weren't torturing anybody. I don't buy this new liberal kick that these "enhanced interrogation tactics" are torture. I think that's purely a political ploy and has nothing to do with our values as Americans.

However, most of that stuff can just be chalked up to hindsight being 20/20. It's easy to look back to the past and think "well they should have done this and this." Especially anything concerning Hurricane Katrina and 9/11.

Some of those are mistakes, but not big ones unless you're predisposed to hate Bush. My list of Bush's greatest mistakes would be two:
1. Forcing Israel to give land to the terrorist organization known as "The Palestinian People."
2. the bank bailout last October

However, just because I disagree with him on these issues doesn't mean that I think he did a terrible job. He kept our country safe from terror for 7 years, deposed a brutal dictator, freed an entire nation, and forced the world's top terrorist organizations back underground. That's success in my book and I think history will reflect that.

CAVEMAN
04-22-2009, 09:17 PM
What is your definition of torture?

Here is an article for all to read. It comes from an Iraqi interrogator.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/28/AR2008112802242.html

Why is it that the United States tried and convicted someone for the crime of waterboarding in WW2, yet when we do it it isn't a crime? I posted the link in an earlier thread, or possibly this thread.

The media hasn't brainwashed all, and Bush was far from a great president. You just refuse to take off your rose colored glasses when looking at him.


Here is a nicely summarized list of some of W's worst moments in his presidency.


You may agree, you may not.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/4228722/George-Bushs-20-worst-moments.html

:rolleyes: Yeah, were just the "evil bullying" nation! And GWB is the devil!

Sure sounds like you have swallowed the media's propaganda to me!

rockdawg21
04-22-2009, 09:49 PM
Waterboard them all.

They are lucky I wasn't guarding the dude who planned 911 I would have used gasoline.
Gasoline? You're no fun. Use diesel, it burns slower. :laugh:

Buzzard
04-22-2009, 10:59 PM
:rolleyes: Yeah, were just the "evil bullying" nation! And GWB is the devil!

Sure sounds like you have swallowed the media's propaganda to me!

Sounds like you have a blind eye towards his horrible tenure as president, but to each his own. You and others still haven't answered the question regarding the United States convicting someone for war crimes in WW2 for the crime of waterboarding. I wonder why? Do you just wish that by not responding it will go away? Is it only a crime when someone other than the U.S. does it?

I don't get my news from television, except perhaps for local news. I use many different sources to formulate my opinions, as using just one source will not paint the entire picture.

Did you read the article from the interrogator? Surely someone who has been there done that has a little more insight into what went on than you or I, correct?

NateR
04-22-2009, 11:02 PM
Sounds like you have a blind eye towards his horrible tenure as president,

It's nonsense like this that makes me disregard most of your political posts as hate-filled drivel.

Buzzard
04-22-2009, 11:23 PM
It's nice that you chose such an "unbiased" website for your "evidence.":rolleyes: However I disagree with most of these "worst moments." In fact, many of those, primarily limiting stem cell research and abandoning the Kyoto protocol, I believe that President Bush should be commended for. I'm against embryonic stem cell research and I don't think we need to be putting ourselves under the thumb of the UN for this myth called "global warming."

I used the website because it contained a list of what some have called his worst moments. I didn't submit evidence, I submitted a list of someone's opinions. I even stated that you may or may not agree. You seem to disagree with most of them, but I know many that do agree with them.

I also believe that the tax cuts for the wealthy are a good thing and I disagree that it ties in with the economic crash at all.

Again, I disagree. Trickle down economics has never worked. I support tax cuts for those that need it, namely the middle to lower income earners. Sorry, I don't feel that letting the wealthy keep more than the lower tax brackets helps anyone but the wealthy.

Also, they weren't torturing anybody. I don't buy this new liberal kick that these "enhanced interrogation tactics" are torture. I think that's purely a political ploy and has nothing to do with our values as Americans.

Again, why was it a crime when it was performed on an American but not a crime when we do it? Do you think that America should lower itself to the level of terrorists and abandon all of the Geneva Conventions?

However, most of that stuff can just be chalked up to hindsight being 20/20. It's easy to look back to the past and think "well they should have done this and this." Especially anything concerning Hurricane Katrina and 9/11.

Some of those are mistakes, but not big ones unless you're predisposed to hate Bush. My list of Bush's greatest mistakes would be two:
1. Forcing Israel to give land to the terrorist organization known as "The Palestinian People."
2. the bank bailout last October

See, I used to like Bush, until he became the antithesis of what an American is. So, I wasn't predisposed to hate Bush.

However, just because I disagree with him on these issues doesn't mean that I think he did a terrible job. He kept our country safe from terror for 7 years, deposed a brutal dictator, freed an entire nation, and forced the world's top terrorist organizations back underground. That's success in my book and I think history will reflect that.

He didn't keep us safe, especially when he ignored the intel warnings of what eventually happened on 9/11. He failed miserably there as well as in other areas. If he would have been on the ball, 9/11 could have been just another day, instead it is now a day where America was attacked.


.........

Buzzard
04-22-2009, 11:28 PM
It's nonsense like this that makes me disregard most of your political posts as hate-filled drivel.

We have a difference of opinion. I have trouble with your willingness to lower our country's standards to those of terrorists. I personally think Bush brought upon the U.S. an horrible problem that will take us years if not decades to dig ourselves out of. To boot, you appear to me to seem to think that all of the problems are due to Obama and Obama only.

rockdawg21
04-23-2009, 02:39 PM
We have a difference of opinion. I have trouble with your willingness to lower our country's standards to those of terrorists. I personally think Bush brought upon the U.S. an horrible problem that will take us years if not decades to dig ourselves out of. To boot, you appear to me to seem to think that all of the problems are due to Obama and Obama only.
International terrorism was a problem LONG before Bush was in office. Obama isn't going to save us from terrorism by being "buddy buddy" with countries who openly say "kill all Americans."

CAVEMAN
04-23-2009, 04:11 PM
Sounds like you have a blind eye towards his horrible tenure as president, but to each his own. You and others still haven't answered the question regarding the United States convicting someone for war crimes in WW2 for the crime of waterboarding. I wonder why? Do you just wish that by not responding it will go away? Is it only a crime when someone other than the U.S. does it?

I don't get my news from television, except perhaps for local news. I use many different sources to formulate my opinions, as using just one source will not paint the entire picture.

Did you read the article from the interrogator? Surely someone who has been there done that has a little more insight into what went on than you or I, correct?

FYI Buzzard
I was not happy with GWB's 2nd term in office at all. In fact for the 1st time in my life I voted 3rd party in the last election. But all you are spewing is the same liberal propaganda the media spews. And as far as the whole WW2 waterboarding, WATERSMOARDING.......war is war! AND like it or not, you do what it takes to win.

It's very tiresome.....but, if you want to conitnue defending a party that:
A)Just moved this country in a huge step to Socialism.
B) Just ruined this country financially for the next 10 generations because of their out of control spending. I'm sure it will be even worse once their 4 years are up.
C)Is cutting the military budget in half and may be more! AND on top of it trying to become friends with known terrorist countries.(Feel protected, do ya?)
D) Is going to ruin the country even more with their campaign of Global Warming Panic! Which they will use to further their agenda of Socialism.
E) Bows to every whim of the United Nations, WHO does not have our interests at heart.

Be my guess Buzzard! But in my book, you don't have a leg to stand on!

Crisco
04-23-2009, 04:16 PM
FYI Buzzard
I was not happy with GWB's 2nd term in office at all. In fact for the 1st time in my life I voted 3rd party in the last election. But all you are spewing is the same liberal propaganda the media spews. And as far as the whole WW2 waterboarding, WATERSMOARDING.......war is war! AND like it or not, you do what it takes to win.

It's very tiresome.....but, if you want to conitnue defending a party that:
A)Just moved this country in a huge step to Socialism.
B) Just ruined this country financially for the next 10 generations because of their out of control spending. I'm sure it will be even worse once their 4 years are up.
C)Is cutting the military budget in half and may be more! AND on top of it trying to become friends with known terrorist countries.(Feel protected, do ya?)
D) Is going to ruin the country even more with their campaign of Global Warming Panic! Which they will use to further their agenda of Socialism.
E) Bows to every whim of the United Nations, WHO does not have our interests at heart.

Be my guess Buzzard! But in my book, you don't have a leg to stand on!

Don't talk to comrade Buzzard that way.

Tyburn
04-23-2009, 05:28 PM
Don't talk to comrade Buzzard that way.
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: da, da... :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Buzzard
04-24-2009, 12:10 AM
FYI Buzzard
I was not happy with GWB's 2nd term in office at all. In fact for the 1st time in my life I voted 3rd party in the last election. But all you are spewing is the same liberal propaganda the media spews. And as far as the whole WW2 waterboarding, WATERSMOARDING.......war is war! AND like it or not, you do what it takes to win.

It's very tiresome.....but, if you want to conitnue defending a party that:
A)Just moved this country in a huge step to Socialism.
B) Just ruined this country financially for the next 10 generations because of their out of control spending. I'm sure it will be even worse once their 4 years are up.
C)Is cutting the military budget in half and may be more! AND on top of it trying to become friends with known terrorist countries.(Feel protected, do ya?)
D) Is going to ruin the country even more with their campaign of Global Warming Panic! Which they will use to further their agenda of Socialism.
E) Bows to every whim of the United Nations, WHO does not have our interests at heart.

Be my guess Buzzard! But in my book, you don't have a leg to stand on!


Wow, still won't answer the question. I guess you can't come up with any reasonable response to it, so you would rather ignore it than answer it. Sad that you want us to lower ourselves to the level of terrorists.

A. First off, this thread isn't about nor have my replies been in response to defending the party causing this country's slide into socialism as you state.

B. Perhaps if the Bush administration hadn't thrown our economy down the toilet, Obama wouldn't have made a bailout after the Bush administration made theirs. Were you ok with the Bush bailout and his steps taking us down the road into socialism? Hindsight is 20/20 so they say.

C. Do you have any sources to show that Obama is cutting the military budget in half? Please cite them because I call BS. It's better to keep your enemies close than to isolate yourself with policies which cause the world to hate you. Bush did well with the latter. I never felt safe with Bush in office, especially since he didn't act on known intel about the attacks on 9/11, instead trying to make people safe by taking away rights and other not so good stuff.

D. While I am not in agreement of that there is a global warming crisis, I don't see how this part of Obama's plan is actually bad. US President hopeful Barack Obama said that he would spend $150 billion over 10 years on a push to develop new renewable fuel and clean coal technology. His aggressive strategy would require an 80% greenhouse gases reduction and require those who pollute to pay for that right on a per-ton of carbon basis.

What parts of his plans do you claim are socialistic?

E. Do you have any sources on this claim?

It seems that your book is missing many pages, including a setup, plot, and a resolution. You have the confrontation part down well though.:wink:

CAVEMAN
04-24-2009, 10:16 PM
Wow, still won't answer the question. I guess you can't come up with any reasonable response to it, so you would rather ignore it than answer it. Sad that you want us to lower ourselves to the level of terrorists.

A. First off, this thread isn't about nor have my replies been in response to defending the party causing this country's slide into socialism as you state.

B. Perhaps if the Bush administration hadn't thrown our economy down the toilet, Obama wouldn't have made a bailout after the Bush administration made theirs. Were you ok with the Bush bailout and his steps taking us down the road into socialism? Hindsight is 20/20 so they say.

C. Do you have any sources to show that Obama is cutting the military budget in half? Please cite them because I call BS. It's better to keep your enemies close than to isolate yourself with policies which cause the world to hate you. Bush did well with the latter. I never felt safe with Bush in office, especially since he didn't act on known intel about the attacks on 9/11, instead trying to make people safe by taking away rights and other not so good stuff.

D. While I am not in agreement of that there is a global warming crisis, I don't see how this part of Obama's plan is actually bad.

What parts of his plans do you claim are socialistic?

E. Do you have any sources on this claim?

It seems that your book is missing many pages, including a setup, plot, and a resolution. You have the confrontation part down well though.:wink:

Quoted from the Townhall Meeting:

Obama:
Today, the electricity we use is carried along a grid of lines and wires that dates back to Thomas Edison, a grid that canít support the demands of clean energy. This means weíre using 19th- and 20th-century technologies to battle 21st-century problems like climate change and energy security.

It also means that places like North Dakota can produce a lot of wind energy but canít deliver it to communities that want it, leading to a gap between how much clean energy we are using and how much we could be using.

The investment we are making today will create a newer, smarter electric grid that will allow for the broader use of alternative energy. We will build on the work thatís being done in places like Boulder, Colorado, a community that is on pace to be the worldís first Smart Grid city. This investment will place Smart Meters in homes to make our energy bills lower, make outages less likely and make it easier to use clean energy.

Itís an investment that will save taxpayers over $1 billion by slashing energy costs in our federal buildings by 25 percent and save working families hundreds of dollars a year on their energy bills by weatherizing over 1 million homes. And itís an investment that takes the important first step towards a nationwide transmission superhighway that will connect our cities to the windy plains of the Dakotas and the sunny deserts of the Southwest.

A smart meter is an interval or time-of-use meter. Yes the government will decide when you will have AC, lights, heat, etc. Instead of them asking us to save on energy, they are going to do it for us. NOW IF THAT IS NOT SOCIALISM, I DON'T KNOW WHAT IS? You probably will not like the source, but see link:

http://www.foxnews.com/video2/video08.html?maven_referralObject=3833578&maven_referralPlaylistId=&sRevUrl=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,509669,00.html

Can you explain, BUZZARD?

Buzzard
04-25-2009, 01:45 AM
Quoted from the Townhall Meeting:

Obama:
Today, the electricity we use is carried along a grid of lines and wires that dates back to Thomas Edison, a grid that canít support the demands of clean energy. This means weíre using 19th- and 20th-century technologies to battle 21st-century problems like climate change and energy security.

It also means that places like North Dakota can produce a lot of wind energy but canít deliver it to communities that want it, leading to a gap between how much clean energy we are using and how much we could be using.

The investment we are making today will create a newer, smarter electric grid that will allow for the broader use of alternative energy. We will build on the work thatís being done in places like Boulder, Colorado, a community that is on pace to be the worldís first Smart Grid city. This investment will place Smart Meters in homes to make our energy bills lower, make outages less likely and make it easier to use clean energy.

Itís an investment that will save taxpayers over $1 billion by slashing energy costs in our federal buildings by 25 percent and save working families hundreds of dollars a year on their energy bills by weatherizing over 1 million homes. And itís an investment that takes the important first step towards a nationwide transmission superhighway that will connect our cities to the windy plains of the Dakotas and the sunny deserts of the Southwest.

A smart meter is an interval or time-of-use meter. Yes the government will decide when you will have AC, lights, heat, etc. Instead of them asking us to save on energy, they are going to do it for us. NOW IF THAT IS NOT SOCIALISM, I DON'T KNOW WHAT IS? You probably will not like the source, but see link:

http://www.foxnews.com/video2/video08.html?maven_referralObject=3833578&maven_referralPlaylistId=&sRevUrl=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,509669,00.html

Can you explain, BUZZARD?

So the mention of the smart meter/smart grid is what this is all about and all due to Obama and his desire to take us down the road to socialism right? If you would research further, you would find that the places mentioned like Boulder Colorado went to the smart grid first phase in August of 2008. Guess who was president at the time. Austin Texas has also been phasing it in too, long before Obama became president. http://www.metering.com/node/13582

Nowhere did I read that the government will tell you when you can have power rather than tell you that it may cost you more if you use too much during high demand times. Sort of like how capitalism works with the supply and demand system. Are you anti-capitalism?

CAVEMAN
04-28-2009, 03:48 PM
So the mention of the smart meter/smart grid is what this is all about and all due to Obama and his desire to take us down the road to socialism right? If you would research further, you would find that the places mentioned like Boulder Colorado went to the smart grid first phase in August of 2008. Guess who was president at the time. Austin Texas has also been phasing it in too, long before Obama became president. http://www.metering.com/node/13582

Nowhere did I read that the government will tell you when you can have power rather than tell you that it may cost you more if you use too much during high demand times. Sort of like how capitalism works with the supply and demand system. Are you anti-capitalism?

First off....you keep coming at me with this whole Bush thing......I was not happy with Bush either. He made some real steps in his 2nd term that were definitely not conservative moves. GWB's $700 billion stimulus was just as much a socialist move than what the Obama administration is doing now.

2nd.....Did you not watch the video where Carol Browner( Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change) was quoted:

"We(which means the government) need to make sure that we're moving electricity in the smartest way using the most cost effective electricity at the right time of day. Eventually, we can get to a system where an Electric Company(owned by the government) will be able to hold back some of the power so that your A/C won't operate at its peak. You'll still be able to cool your house, but that'll be a savings to the consumer."

How do you interpret that statement, Buzzard? How are you able to cool your house if your A/C unit is not running at its peak? Pure and plain socialism! Oh, but they had to sugar coat it at the end with, "but that will be a savings to the consumer.":rolleyes:

Miss Foxy
04-28-2009, 03:50 PM
I officially changed myself to the American Independent Party. I could not stand GWB Senior & Jr.. I am not liking Obama either... Who knows whats in store for the future with our politicians...:unsure-1:

Buzzard
04-28-2009, 08:02 PM
First off....you keep coming at me with this whole Bush thing......I was not happy with Bush either. He made some real steps in his 2nd term that were definitely not conservative moves. GWB's $700 billion stimulus was just as much a socialist move than what the Obama administration is doing now.

2nd.....Did you not watch the video where Carol Browner( Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change) was quoted:

"We(which means the government) need to make sure that we're moving electricity in the smartest way using the most cost effective electricity at the right time of day. Eventually, we can get to a system where an Electric Company(owned by the government) will be able to hold back some of the power so that your A/C won't operate at its peak. You'll still be able to cool your house, but that'll be a savings to the consumer."

How do you interpret that statement, Buzzard? How are you able to cool your house if your A/C unit is not running at its peak? Pure and plain socialism! Oh, but they had to sugar coat it at the end with, "but that will be a savings to the consumer.":rolleyes:

1. My apologies then for thinking you were a Bush fan who overlooked his many bad decisions for America.

2. Yes I watched the video. I believe that you are making an assumption though that all electric companies will be government owned, which makes it sound socialistic. I believe that you could still cool your home to a comfortable level, but not able to crank up the a/c to bring the temperature down to levels in the mid 60's with your a/c not running at peak. It is sort of like a grocery store that has a product on sale, but limits the amount the consumer is able to purchase at one time. If all electric companies go to government owned, then yes I would be worried and would not like it.

I don't know what will happen during the next four years. I hope that things will turn around, but I know it will take some time to dig us out of the mess that the last administration left this country in.

CAVEMAN
04-28-2009, 09:38 PM
1. My apologies then for thinking you were a Bush fan who overlooked his many bad decisions for America.

2. Yes I watched the video. I believe that you are making an assumption though that all electric companies will be government owned, which makes it sound socialistic. I believe that you could still cool your home to a comfortable level, but not able to crank up the a/c to bring the temperature down to levels in the mid 60's with your a/c not running at peak. It is sort of like a grocery store that has a product on sale, but limits the amount the consumer is able to purchase at one time. If all electric companies go to government owned, then yes I would be worried and would not like it.

I don't know what will happen during the next four years. I hope that things will turn around, but I know it will take some time to dig us out of the mess that the last administration left this country in.

If these so-called bailouts continue, which is nothing more than the federal government buying up the private sector, the government will own the electric companies as well!:wink:

Although I did not care for GWB's 2nd term, I don't believe he caused this mess all by himself. COLLECTIVELY both democrats AND republicans brought this nation to where it is. The last 20 years has been nothing but bigger government and bigger debt. And so far in Obama's first 100 days in office, he is using the same play book. It is going to take generations to pay back the debt that has been racked up in the last 6-8 months....IF it ever gets paid back.

I can honestly say unless there is some serious reform in both parties, I will never vote Republican or Democrat again.