Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 01-25-2010, 07:46 PM
 
Location: Jonquil City (aka Smyrna) Georgia- by Atlanta
16,259 posts, read 24,766,887 times
Reputation: 3587

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dockside View Post
Obama to Diane Sawyer - "I'd rather be a really good one-term president than a mediocre two-term president," he told ABC's "World News" anchor Diane Sawyer in an exclusive interview today.

President Obama Rather Be Really Good One Term President - ABC News

I'm beginning to realize Obama may only be a one-term president, and a mediocre one at that. IMO the only thing he will be remembered for is being the first black president.
He has one thing going for him- the other party does not have anybody better.

 
Old 01-25-2010, 07:48 PM
 
23,838 posts, read 23,127,661 times
Reputation: 9409
Quote:
Originally Posted by ndfmnlf View Post
BS. The recession and financial crisis had been bubbling over since late 2007. The recession officially started in December 2007. Bear Stearns collapsed in March 2008. The mess happened right smack during Bush's term. It wasn't until Obama took over in January 2009 did the economy and financial markets recover. The stock market has since rocketed up by 70% since March 2009. Unemployment has leveled off, manufacturing has picked up, consumer confidence has improved. The only thing that hasn't improved is your ability to understand economic statistics.
You provided absolutely nothing in this post. Nothing.

Yes, the recession started in 2007. Most people understand this. But the reality of the severity never hit home until September 2008 when Lehman Brothers collapsed. Why do you think TARP was introduced? Was TARP introduced after Bear Stearns collapsed? No it was not. Bear Stearns may have been a pre-cursor, but every thinking person who was paying attention knows that Lehman Brothers was the catalyst. This happened a mere 2 months before the election. The only thing missing from this equation is your ability to recall that Barack Obama did not campaign on cleaning up any mess until it became apparent that there was a financial collapse possible. And that possibility didn't become truly evident until September 2008. Obama had no idea it was coming during the first 2 years of his campaign. Even the Federal Reserve has acknowledged that they didn't see it coming. For you to say otherwise is just outright dishonest.
 
Old 01-25-2010, 07:50 PM
 
Location: Edwardsville, IL
1,814 posts, read 2,498,236 times
Reputation: 1472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceece View Post
We wont know until the next election. Alot can happen betweennow and then.

Really hoping for this sooner than later:

 
Old 01-25-2010, 07:51 PM
 
3,436 posts, read 2,949,749 times
Reputation: 1787
Realistically speaking, I think Obama will be a one term president. Most democrats are and judging by the level of hatred toward him, it definitely will be no surprise.The man can't sneeze without being acused of being part of some evil world domination plot. The right has done everything they possiby can to sabotage everything he does and then there are always the racists.
 
Old 01-25-2010, 07:52 PM
 
Location: ✶✶✶✶
15,216 posts, read 30,563,119 times
Reputation: 10851
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxed in Maine View Post
That's a real nice piece of revisionist history.

Clinton spent eight years cutting the military and neutering our intelligence agencies with his lame, sally policies. Decades of intelligence work around the world was lost because of him.

When we went running out of Somalia in 1993 with our tails between our legs, terrorist leaders viewed us as weak and vulnerable. The planning for 9-11 started soon after.

Bush couldn't get our intell agencies turned around in time to stop it.
Right. And where was the support for going after al-Qaeda on either side before? Remember the bombing in Riyadh? Remember the USS Cole? And what changed on Sept. 12 other than there was a big hole in Lower Manhattan and in the Pentagon? Surely nobody thought that could happen? Give me a break. And I guess suddenly the military was funded just swell the day after as we were getting ready to invade Afghanistan because it's not like we knew who was hiding him. We had to know. We probably helped build him a new bunker when we gave the Taliban $43M in March '01 in probably the most stupid move in the sordid history of the "war on drugs." That should've actually been my "start from the start" point, but it slipped my mind at the time.

Even after Clinton's cuts we still spent more money on the military than anyone else in the world. By a country mile. The idea that we couldn't go after bin Laden before because of military budget cuts is ludicrous. It's not like we had to invade Russia. (Mind, I'm hardly Clinton's biggest fan either and he has dirt on his hands for the mess we're in too, so don't go thinking I'm trying to make excuses for him.)
 
Old 01-25-2010, 07:58 PM
 
4,183 posts, read 6,524,933 times
Reputation: 1734
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
You provided absolutely nothing in this post. Nothing.

Yes, the recession started in 2007. Most people understand this. But the reality of the severity never hit home until September 2008 when Lehman Brothers collapsed. Why do you think TARP was introduced? Was TARP introduced after Bear Stearns collapsed? No it was not. Bear Stearns may have been a pre-cursor, but every thinking person who was paying attention knows that Lehman Brothers was the catalyst. This happened a mere 2 months before the election. The only thing missing from this equation is your ability to recall that Barack Obama did not campaign on cleaning up any mess until it became apparent that there was a financial collapse possible. And that possibility didn't become truly evident until September 2008. Obama had no idea it was coming. For you to say otherwise is just ouright dishonest.
Every thinking person actually knew back in late December 2007 and early 2008 that the economy was in deep trouble. Heck, that's why even Bush himself passed a stimulus package to try to prop up the economy in early 2008, but I bet you didn't know that. Bear Stearns' collapse happened way before Lehman. I was following the Democratic primary and I know the financial crisis was among the top issues that Obama and Hillary Clinton were fighting over. I remember Hillary had a town hall meeting prior to the Nevada caucuses addressing the people in Vegas whose homes were foreclosed on, and I remember Barack Obama responding in kind. I remember that housing was a big topic to the point that Hillary even linked Obama to the slumlord Rezko during the South Carolina primary debate in an attempt to milk the housing crisis. No, my friend, it is you who has not been paying attention.
 
Old 01-25-2010, 08:02 PM
 
1,747 posts, read 1,953,701 times
Reputation: 441
Quote:
Originally Posted by ndfmnlf View Post
No, no, no, I'm actually richer today than when George W. Bush was in office. My portfolio doesn't lie. Obama's doing something right.
Typical of you Progressies........to be most concerned with your precious portfolios and blame the righties for being so greedy.
Well, do as your party is asking of you......and SHARE your wealth, dammit!

Soon enough, I suppose.
 
Old 01-25-2010, 08:02 PM
 
23,838 posts, read 23,127,661 times
Reputation: 9409
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfre81 View Post
Right. And where was the support for going after al-Qaeda on either side before? Remember the bombing in Riyadh? Remember the USS Cole? And what changed on Sept. 12 other than there was a big hole in Lower Manhattan and in the Pentagon? Surely nobody thought that could happen? Give me a break. And I guess suddenly the military was funded just swell the day after as we were getting ready to invade Afghanistan because it's not like we knew who was hiding him. We had to know. We probably helped build him a new bunker when we gave the Taliban $43M in March '01 in probably the most stupid move in the sordid history of the "war on drugs." That should've actually been my "start from the start" point, but it slipped my mind at the time.

Even after Clinton's cuts we still spent more money on the military than anyone else in the world. By a country mile. The idea that we couldn't go after bin Laden before because of military budget cuts is ludicrous. It's not like we had to invade Russia. (Mind, I'm hardly Clinton's biggest fan either and he has dirt on his hands for the mess we're in too, so don't go thinking I'm trying to make excuses for him.)
You're looking at this from a macro level - ie. military budgets, military capability, etc.

What you're leaving out is that Clinton cut the CIA field officer ranks by 25% at a crucial period in history. Furthermore, Clinton refused to get permission from the Saudi government to allow the CIA and FBI full access to investigate the bombing of Khobar Towers. We were confined to a boxed in area, and if we crossed the "line" then we would have been expelled. In essence, we were shut out of a region of the world at a very crucial point in time (1998). In the world of coulda-woulda-shoulda's, Clinton did us a huge disservice by keeping us out of Saudia Arabia, especially knowing in hindsight that a large number of the 9/11 attackers were Saudi Arabian.
 
Old 01-25-2010, 08:02 PM
 
Location: Maine
119 posts, read 263,576 times
Reputation: 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfre81 View Post
Even after Clinton's cuts we still spent more money on the military than anyone else in the world. By a country mile. The idea that we couldn't go after bin Laden before because of military budget cuts is ludicrous. It's not like we had to invade Russia. (Mind, I'm hardly Clinton's biggest fan either and he has dirt on his hands for the mess we're in too, so don't go thinking I'm trying to make excuses for him.)

Clinton had multiple chances to kill or capture OBL, he just did't have enough sack to go through with it.
 
Old 01-25-2010, 08:03 PM
 
Location: Jonquil City (aka Smyrna) Georgia- by Atlanta
16,259 posts, read 24,766,887 times
Reputation: 3587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Factsplease View Post
Realistically speaking, I think Obama will be a one term president. Most democrats are and judging by the level of hatred toward him, it definitely will be no surprise.The man can't sneeze without being acused of being part of some evil world domination plot. The right has done everything they possiby can to sabotage everything he does and then there are always the racists.
The right cannot do anything to Obama that Obama does not let them do. He could completely annihilate them if he would just stand up and say ENOUGH. They did the same thing to Bill Clinton. They tried everything to drive him out of office. But he stood up to them. Obama has bigger majorities in Congress and the Senate than really about any other Democrat has ever had. He should use them. Rule number one: reward your friends and punish your enemies.
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.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:16 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top