Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I see what you are getting at with the Fast and Furious Bush connection, but do not characterize the Bush Administrations part in fnf as you do.. I do not think Bush did not do the country any good. However, to say the Bush administration initiated Fast and Furious is inaccurate. The scheme for fnf was developed under the Bush administration, but never given the go ahead. There is a big difference between seriously considering a plan, but not acting upon it, and actually acting on a plan and then not managing it well. As indeed occurred under Mr Obama's watch.
Can't disagree with anything else you have said.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mohawkx
To be honest and purely objective, the Fast and furious fiasco was initiated under the Bush admin and obviously lacked proper oversight with the new administration under Holder. Very unfortunate and a real black eye for the Admin.
I also believe that the Administration has silently given up on the Syrian rebels for two reasons. Too many bad actors among the rebels and they are infested with Al Quaeda. Also the fact that Iranian backed Hezbollah has entered the fight against the rebels and Hezbollah are not just some shopkeeper that picked up an AK47. These guys are very professional and beating the crap out of the Syrian rebels. The fight in Syria has turned into a Sunni/Shiite conflict as the rebels are Sunni and the Government is Alawite but supported by Shiite Iran.
It is best we slowly back out of the Syrian conflict for the best interests of our country but we can't do it publicly because the Saudi'a are funding the Sunni Rebels there and the Saudi are our allies. There are very few arms actually going to the rebels that actually come from America. Most come from Qatar and Saudi Arabia.
What a stinking mess.
He is not the best, but if you judge him by the same standards like all other presidents, which is by getting things done which he set out to do, then he is doing ok so far. Whether or not people agree with the things he set out to do is an entirely different matter. That is a matter of personal opinion, and does not make Obama any more or less successful. It is funny people call him the worst president only because they do not agree with his goals.
wait 20 years. his whole legacy is intertwined with his health care bill.
if it succeeds, he will be in the top 10.
Since it is raising the costs even now how do you think it has the remote chance (and it's surely not going to decrease in its cost)?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
