like I said...neat trick:uhuh:

Johnny, if a liberal accuses me of not caring about women, then I think it's pretty valid to point out that I am opposed to the slaughter of 2000 unborn girls a day, and to point out that most liberals support that.

If the shoe fits Johnny, if the shoe fits...

Wrong. First of all, I don't insult all people who disagree with me. In the case of Maddow, it's irrefutable fact that she likes to call people like me "tea bagging racists", which is obviously meant to be derogatory.

And second of all, you said that insulting was inappropriate. I wonder when you got appointed the God of deciding who it's appropriate to insult, and who it's not appropriate to insult. But liberals often anoint themselves with such authority, in order to defend an obvious hypocrisy.

Doesn't matter how hard he works if he does a crappy job. There are no "A's for effort" in his position. And his childish remarks and smarmy attitude make people dislike him. That doesn't make him detached, but it makes him look like an ass.

The jury doesn't decide on the job he's done for another year. I think Obama can present a pretty effective presidency if he can get his PR together.

As for childish and smarmy remarks, I'm not sure there's much here to go on...unless you hated him to begin with.

-spence

"the Republican efforts to maintain authority and destroy Clinton and Obama really has no equal"

Sorry, remember Sarah Palin? Libs weren't out to destroy her? MSNBC is STILL obsessed with her, and she isn't even running for anything.

"From everything I've read he's completely engaged and works his ass off."

Spence, let me get this right. If you "read" that Bush was awesome, obviously you would dispute it. But when you read that Obama works his butt off, that's good enough for you, it must be true?

Just trying to clarify.

"As for childish and smarmy remarks, I'm not sure there's much here to go on."

on Sarah Palin..."you can put lipstick onm a pig, it's still a pig".

On blue collar Americans: they cling to their guns and religion because they are bitter and racist.

On the Cambridge police: I wasn't there, and I have no idea what happened, but it's fair to say the police acted stupidly.

On those who criticized him for his remarks about the Cambridge police: I'm sorry if people took my remarks as derogatory. (Is there another way to interpret the word "stupid"?)

On his bowling skills: I look like one of those special olympians out there (ha ha ha!!!! Boy, there's nothing funnier than making fun of handicapped people!)

on republicans: they need to get in the back of the bus.

This is just off the top of my head. Spence, care to comment on your assertion??

She's still quite influential in the GOP though...as odd as it may seem.

As for efforts to discredit her, these were a response to an open invitation. Her VP nod was a trick play and she was obviously not ready for the job, if she ever would be...although she's making a hell of a lot of money just hanging out there :hihi:


I think Bush was a disengaged President. He thought of himself as the "decider" and wanted to make a mark but really didn't want to own the decision making process. In all I think he's a decent guy who just gave up too much authority to those around him. The proof here is in the pudding.

Obama by contrast appears to put a lot more mental energy into the job. I don't think he has a bad attitude or hates America. If anything he's insulated himself too much from inside the beltway jabber and hasn't worked to control the debate. This has hindered his effectiveness.

There are limitations to both styles.

-spence

You're not serious, are you? He'd need the miracle of all miracles to present an effective presidency. As for me hating him, nope. You're not gonna bait me with that old crap. I may not have voted for him, but I hoped he would succeed. You can find that in a post I made way back when he was elected. Even you can find plenty of instances where he's been smarmy and childish. Plenty to go on there.

Spence is hilarious :biglaugh:

Spence, PLEASE enlighten me...in what context did Michelle mean that statement?

"Her VP nod was a trick play "

Read some actual facts. At the time of her nomination, she had the highest approval ratings of any governor in the country. Her nomination catapulted McCain ahead of Obama in every poll, and they stayed ahead till the economy collapsed.

Besides voting present what qualifications did Obama have to be voted president compared tgo Sarah Palin being VICE president?
Obama could have shown his love for this country and it's laws by telling his Aunt and Uncle to please leave and reenter legally. Wouldn't it be nice to have an American citzen working the package store job instead, I'll bet a vet would show some appreciation to have aunt tootiefruities apartment rather than her opinion that we owe her citizenship now (she is on video check youtube.
Did they ever get anyone to replace Michele Obama and her $350k a year job and if so are they getting the same pay.
Besides the automakers (union) bailout and the stimulous whcih went to mostly state and federal employees and contractors who has he helped?
How much has she cost us compared to previous first ladies?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

easy..............watch the video...her dreams were coming true

'Barack stood up that day,' talking about a visit to Chicago neighborhoods, 'and spoke words that have stayed with me ever since. He talked about 'The world as it is' and 'The world as it should be…' And, 'All of us driven by a simple belief that the world as it is just won't do – that we have an obligation to, fight for the world as it should be." MICHELLE OBAMA DNC CONVENTION


"As an organizer I start from where the world is, as it is, not as I would like it to be. That we accept the world as it is does not in any sense weaken our desire to change it into what we believe it should be - it is necessary to begin where the world is if we are going to change it to what we think it should be. That means working in the system.

There's another reason for working inside the system. Dostoevsky said that taking a new step is what people fear most. Any revolutionary change must be preceded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude toward change among the mass of our people. They must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and chance the future. This acceptance is the reformation essential to any revolution. To bring on this reformation requires that the organizer work inside the system, among not only the middle class but the 40 per cent of American families - more than seventy million people - whose income range from $5,000 to $10,000 a year (in 1971). They cannot be dismissed by labeling them blue collar or hard hat. They will not continue to be relatively passive and slightly challenging. If we fail to communicate with them, if we don't encourage them to form alliances with us, they will move to the right. Maybe they will anyway, but let's not let it happen by default."

We will start with the system because there is no other place to start from except political lunacy. It is most important for those of us who want revolutionary change to understand that revolution must be proceeded by reformation. To assume that a political revolution can survive without the supporting base of a popular reformation is to ask for the impossible in politics.

Men don't like to step abruptly out of the security of familiar experience; they need a bridge to cross from their own experience to a new way. A revolutionary organizer must shake up the prevailing patterns of their lives--agitate, create disenchantment and discontent with the current values, to produce, if not a passion for change, at least a passive, affirmative, no-challenging climate.

A reformation means that masses of our people have reached the point of disillusionment with past ways and values. They don't know what will work but they do know that the prevailing system is self-defeating, frustrating, and hopeless. They won't but won't strongly oppose those who do. The time is then ripe for revolution.

Change means movement. Movement means friction. Only in the frictionless vacuum of a nonexistent abstract world can movement or change occur without that abrasive friction of conflict." SAUL ALINSKY


they were the "ONES" they'd been waiting for :uhuh: no doubt it was the first time in her adult life she was really proud of America

Quite simply, the context was about the upwelling of people, especially younger people, getting excited and engaged with their government.

The line was a bit sensationalistic and Her speechwriters/handlers should have realized it left her too open for criticism. But given the situation it's also a quite reasonable thing to believe, the energy around Obama's candidacy was like something I know I've never seen in American politics.

The reversal, that this is the first time she's ever been proud of her country as an adult is really quite a silly thing to believe when you put a little thought into it, especially considering how the Obama's have remarked that their story would be impossible anywhere but the USA. Yes it fits ScottW's tin-foil hat Alynsky obsessed fantasy of commies trying to undermine America, but outside of that, it's just a clumsy remark that was blown out of proportion by a well coordinated effort to tear Obama down.

-spence

no...it acutually makes sense in context with her many other comments...


The Other Obama by Lauren Collins

Obama begins with a broad assessment of life in America in 2008, and life is not good: we’re a divided country, we’re a country that is “just downright mean,” we are “guided by fear,” we’re a nation of cynics, sloths, and complacents. “We have become a nation of struggling folks who are barely making it every day,” she said, as heads bobbed in the pews. “Folks are just jammed up, and it’s gotten worse over my lifetime. And, doggone it, I’m young. Forty-four!”

From these bleak generalities, Obama moves into specific complaints. Used to be, she will say, that you could count on a decent education in the neighborhood. But now there are all these charter schools and magnet schools that you have to “finagle” to get into. (Obama herself attended a magnet school, but never mind.) Health care is out of reach (“Let me tell you, don’t get sick in America”), pensions are disappearing, college is too expensive, and even if you can figure out a way to go to college you won’t be able to recoup the cost of the degree in many of the professions for which you needed it in the first place. “You’re looking at a young couple that’s just a few years out of debt,” Obama said. “See, because, we went to those good schools, and we didn’t have trust funds. I’m still waiting for Barack’s trust fund. Especially after I heard that #^&#^&#^&#^& Cheney was s’posed to be a relative or something. Give us something here!”

Read more Michelle Obama’s pride and the politics of candor : The New Yorker

Do you think that just by repeating the word "facts" in all your posts it gives them more credibility?

Palin did have high marks as Governor, although I'm not sure I'd put the job on the same level as leading New York, Texas or even Iowa for that matter. We are talking about a state that has a tiny population and vast natural resources that by law benefit the voters. Big topics on the legislative agenda are the wolf population and how to allocate the 442 million Federal tax dollars they decided not to spend on the bridge to nowhere. Hell, that's more than a half million dollars per resident!

When she hit the spotlight it was clear that she was completely unprepared for the job. Yes, she's hot and delivers a solid snarky one liner, but beyond that there's not a lot of substance.

The media attention she attracted did help McCain in the polls, and the economy did have a big impact on their demise. But the simple fact is that the voters saw her as a novelty in the end. She was a trick play that gave McCain a bump, but when the reality of the next year became clear, voters had more confidence in Obama and Biden.

McCain blew it. Had he picked Joe Lieberman as is rumored to be his personal choice...they would have cleaned up.

-spence

Sounds like she understands the frustrations of Middle America pretty damn well.

You should start posting this on the NASCAR blogs :hihi:

-spence

no...sounds like she understands the "frustrations" of the OCCUPY idiots pretty damn well...which makes perfect sense...

sounds like a lot of familiar whining..."give me a damn education, give me some damn healthcare and give me some damn trust fund money"....nice:uhuh:

based on her reception at NASCAR, I'd say "middle America" has got her figured out :uhuh:

Remember, his effectiveness will be judged relative to the challenges he's faced and the anticipated effectiveness of his challenger.

A tanking economy, two wars, 10 natural disasters etc...hell, this would have been tough first term for anyone.

The fact that we didn't slip into a depression, that we're exiting Iraq, that we've killed a heck of a lot of terrorists including OBL, expanded health care coverage, a lot of positive financial and military reforms, restrictions on lobbyists, incentives for small businesses etc...

There's a lot to sell the independent voter on. Obama's bigger worry should be that the left (and younger voters) feel he has led from the middle and might not mobilize like they did in 2008. But, it's looking like the GOP might have a similar problem getting the religious right to the polls as well.

In the end I think it's going to be a very tight race. Obama is a good debater and the debates will probably decide the election.

-spence

Polls seem to show the majority of Americans agree with the Occupy movement on core issues, distribution of wealth, corporate influences on government etc...

Perhaps they're just watching too much FOX News and are misinformed?

-spence

and speaking of obscure polls

"Fairleigh #^&#^&#^&#^&inson University on Monday found that people who get their news from Fox News know significantly less about news both in the U.S. and the world than people who watch no news at all.

In a survey of 612 New Jersey natives......."

a Fairleigh #^&#^&#^&#^&inson poll of 612 New Jerseyites is confirmation that Fox news viewers are misinformed/less informed?

I guess you really have to dig deep these days to continue the farce:uhuh:



Why blacks aren’t embracing Occupy Wall Street - The Washington Post
:huh:

No, I said agree on the core issues...not do you support the "movement" which would include methods as well as a broader spectrum issues.

The CBS poll you've cited recorded 66% agree wealth should be distributed more evenly, a core issue for OWS.

The ABC poll done just after goes further, 61% not only saying wealth should be distributed more evenly, but that the federal government should take action.

Washington Post-ABC News Poll (washingtonpost.com)

The majority also seem to want corporations to have less influence in Washington, for instance 62% in this Gallup poll from earlier this year.

In U.S., Majority Still Wants Less Corporate Influence

It's time to really ask who's interests is Congress looking after. Yes, that was a rhetorical question...

-spence

"But given the situation it's also a quite reasonable thing to believe, the energy around Obama's candidacy was like something I know I've never seen in American politics."

Spence, stop the spin, OK? If Michells said "gee, I've never seen this kind of enthusiasm", than your justification would have merit. That's not remotely what she said. She said she had never before been proud of this country.

"The reversal, that this is the first time she's ever been proud of her country as an adult is really quite a silly thing to believe when you put a little thought into it"

OK, so according to you, it's silly and thoughtless for me to believe that she meant what she said?

Spence, when Bush put his foot in his mouth, did you bend over backwards to excuse it? Or did you hold him accountable for it?

"Polls seem to show the majority of Americans agree with the Occupy movement on core issues"

What polls are you referring to , polls done by The Daily Worker or Pravda?

Most Americans are opposed to handouts, defacating in public, anarchy, and putting cops in the hospital. Most Americans want to be left alone, not to be harassed on their way to/from work.

"The fact that we didn't slip into a depression"

You're giving Obama credit for something that is literally impossoble to prove. His explosion of the debt may yet push us into that depression, but you don't care about that...

"we're exiting Iraq"

According to the strategy put in place by the previous administration...

"we've killed a heck of a lot of terrorists including OBL"

Thanks to the programs put in place by the previous administration...

"Obama is a good debater and the debates will probably decide the election."

I pray you are right,particularly if Gingrich is the nominee. Obama is a horrible debater, he's good at deflecting attention away from his actual record, and instead focusing on some mythical boogeyman, which in 2012 will be successful white people. That works against a poodle like John McCain, who was too afraid of being called a racist to attack Obama in a debate. An angry pitbull like Newt will have no such concerns, and it will show loud and clear.

you are on a roll today MSNBC, NBC, CBS, WashPOST

I don't think it's a shock that people want to see less influence in Washington by Corporations...particularly when you see the debacles by this administration with tax payers money doled out to questionable corporations who just happen to be well connected...my guess is that many corporations would like to have much less to do with Washington thus having less "influence" but they have to, in many cases, pay to play, and cooperate in the protection schemes and rackets set up by Washington elites or else become a victim of Washington's whims....

how is Washington, the "Federal Government taking action" by increasing Federal taxes on the wealthy and corporations, going to result in a "more even distribution of wealth"? Particularly for those that currently have no federal liability...the fact is that this has nothing to do with spreading the "wealth" around to the bottom but everything to do with further funding a behemoth government, the "bottom" might have a few scraps thrown their way but the redistributing is from the wealthy and corporations to the Federal government to satisfy and further fund the enormous appetite of the Federal bureaucracy....nothing more...

a "core issue" without a lot of thought behind it :uhuh:

Yes.

I have plenty of criticism for Bush, but I don't believe I've ever questioned his love of country or even his personal integrity.

-spence

ABC, CBS, NYTimes, Washington Post...all those radical liberal media outlets.

You're confusing the actions of a few with the beliefs of the many.

-spence

more than a few Spence :uhuh:

Well, the CBO certainly seemed to think the stimulus has a positive impact. If Bush gets to take credit for keeping Americans safe post 9/11 you'd think Obama would get credit for keeping us out of a depression (and no attacks also :hihi)

If Obama was the idiot you claim he had plenty of chances to screw up the timeline for an Iraq withdrawal. As for terrorism, Obama certainly wasn't following the Bush playbook.

Yep, at the voting booth. People don't want to elect an angry pit bull president.

-spence

ThinkProgress Sept. 2011

Ex-CIA Lawyer: Obama Has Changed ‘Virtually Nothing’ From Bush’s Counter-Terror Policies | The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) released a report yesterday on the erosion of civil liberties in the post-9/11 era, which concluded that the Obama administration has continued many of the controversial policies of the Bush administration. Covering the ACLU report, the progressive radio show Democracy Now! interviewed former top Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) lawyer John Rizzo. The Obama administration had changed “virtually nothing with respect to existing CIA programs and operations,” Rizzo said. “Authorities were continued that were originally granted by President Bush beginning shortly after 9/11. Those were all picked up, reviewed and endorsed by the Obama administration.”

Progressive News Daily
August 26, 2011
Obama’s Illegal Assaults
How once-controversial ‘war on terror’ tactics became the new normal

BY Glenn Greenwald

Barack Obama has continued virtually all of George W. Bush and #^&#^&#^&#^& Cheney’s once-controversial terrorism and civil liberties policies, a fact now recognized across the political spectrum. Even the right wing acknowledges these policies have continued under the Obama presidency, which is interesting, because for decades Republicans have made political hay by accusing Democrats of being weak on national security (or “soft on terrorism” in this age of terror).

This premise that the Obama administration has reversed the terror policies is wrong. The new administration has copied most of the Bush program, has expanded some of it and has narrowed only a bit. All of the Obama changes have been at the level of packaging, argumentation, symbol and rhetoric. -Jack Goldsmith

so "it's time to really ask who's interests Congress is looking after".... by giving them more money to "redistribute"?

that makes sense, like handing the guy that is robbing you a gun and inviting him back next week..isn't it?

" If Bush gets to take credit for keeping Americans safe post 9/11 you'd think Obama would get credit for keeping us out of a depression "

Spence, what color is the sky in the world you live in? It is irrefutable fact that Al Queda did not successfully attack us after 09/11, as long as Bush was in power. You assertion that Obama similarly "saved" the economy is literally impossible to prove.

" and no attacks also"

Again, I have to question your grip of reality. ever hear of Ft Hood? And the bomber on the Detroit plane only failed because he was incompetent.

"As for terrorism, Obama certainly wasn't following the Bush playbook."

No? Really? When did Guantanimo Bay get shut down? when did the Patriot Act get repealed? When did Obama stop using predator drones to kill terrorists? I give Obama a fair amount of credit on the terrorism front, and all of his successes, from where I sit, are because he largely left the Bush administration's policies work as intended. The one change Obama made was to to try and make other nations like us more. What has that gotten us? ZIP.

"People don't want to elect an angry pit bull president."

You said the debates would decide. You said that, not me.

How do you know how many times they may have tried? How do you know we weren't headed to a depression?

The reality is, who's in charge often gets credit or blame. But like people understand Bush wasn't responsible for 9/11 the people alo know Obama inherited a mess of an economy. While this is going to drag on his campaign, Republican efforts to label it the "Obama Recession" will likely fail. Obama though has to be able to articulate the value of his policies better than he has.

Clearly the intent of my comment was about Americans being harmed domestically due to a successful terror attack, otherwise I would have noted Richard Ried...

The Ft Hood shooting while tragic wasn't classified as an act of terrorism. The investigation seems to have shown that Hassan acted alone and had no terrorist links to an outside group. More likely his mental health issues and a reluctance to deploy sent him over the edge.

He's charged with premeditated murder, not terrorism.

Obama hasn't closed GTMO because we can't find other nations to take who's left. Didn't he sign an order to have it closed his first day as president? That Obama hasn't closed GTMO yet isn't at all an endorsement of Bush policy, it's another one of Bush's messes he's been left to clean up.

As for the Patriot act, the big issue has always been oversight. As the Senate couldn't get amendments to the bill to a full vote, Obama signed it's renewal and is providing stronger enforcement through the Department of Justice. Again, a departure from Bush policy.

As for predator drones, Obama has again departed from the Bush policy to use drone strikes very selectively in sensitive areas and instead use them as a primary means to go after the enemy where they actually are...like in Pakistan and Yemen.

Obama certainly doesn't share the Bush policy for selective use of torture or remote detention facilities.

Obama certainly doesn't share the Bush tendency for unilateral action.

I'd say they've both shared a desire to promote democracy, but while Bush did it through massive military action, Obama has chosen to lean into opponents and let the local people have more influence over their future.

I'd say their approaches to foreign policy have some similarities, but mostly on inherited issues. For new events Obama has handled them perhaps in a dramatically different manner.

I think the debates are very important to sway independent voters.

It's why Gingrich pushes for the Lincoln Douglas format so he can get into long-winded academic responses to weave philosophy with his deep knowledge of history. It's something he's very talented at...unfortunately it doesn't necessarily show leadership.

-spence

right

ABC NEWS

By RHONDA SCHWARTZ, PIERRE THOMAS (@PierreTABC) and MARTHA RADDATZ (@martharaddatz)
July 28, 2011

A U.S. serviceman is in custody after he allegedly admitted he was planning an attack on his fellow servicemen at the U.S. Army base at Fort Hood, Texas, the same base where 13 people were killed in a 2009 terror attack.

U.S. officials told ABC News an AWOL soldier, identified by the FBI as a Private First Class Naser Jason Abdo, was arrested Wednesday after making a purchase at Guns Galore in Killeen, Texas, the same ammunition store where Maj. Nidal Hasan purchased the weapons he allegedly used to gun down 13 people and wound 32 others on Nov. 5, 2009. According to one senior official, Abdo has also mentioned the name of high profile al Qaeda cleric Anwar al-Awlaki -- the same man investigators said inspired the previous Fort Hood attack along with other potentially deadly terror plots in the U.S. -- though no direct link between Abdo and Awlaki has been found.

When Army Pfc. Naser Jason Abdo, accused of plotting planning a deadly bombing and shooting attack on soldiers at Fort Hood, made his first appearance in court in Waco, Texas, today, he yelled the name of accused Fort Hood shooter Major Nidal Hasan.

Hasan is facing the death penalty for allegedly killing 13 people and wounding more than 30 in an assault on Fort Hood in November 2009.

Like Hasan, Abdo may have taken some of his inspiration from Anwar al-Awlaki, a radical American-born Islamic cleric who is among the leaders of the Yemen-based al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). One senior U.S. official told ABC News that after Abdo was arrested at a Killeen, Texas hotel Wednesday, Abdo mentioned the name of al-Awlaki.

Nidal Hasan had exchanged emails with Awlaki, according to U.S. authorities. Al-Awlaki is believed to have inspired several other terror plots in the U.S. as well, including the bungled Christmas Day underwear bombing of Northwest flight 253.

ABC notes that Abdo was likely inspired by Anwar al-Awlaki, who has repeatedly called for American Muslims to fight the United States.



just a coincidence and not terror:uhuh: juuuuuuust "tragic"

Your own article mentions no direct link, what, you run out of bold?

Besides, Jim and I deal with facts. The fact is the investigation didn't turn up evidence to warrant terror charges. All you have is speculation.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Spence, is there any limit to the lengths you'll go to ignore facts that don't happen to serve your agenda? The Ft Hood shooter called himself a soldier of Allah, he believed that's the cause he was advancing. That makes it an act of terrorism. They all have mental health issues, if that was the litmus test, none of them could be called terrorists.

Unbelievable.

speculation............

Abdo’s motel room was stocked with gunpowder, firearms, and ammunition. Officials told ABC News that an article from al-Qaida’s “Inspire” magazine entitled “How to Build a Bomb in the Kitchen of Your Mom” was also found in his room.

According to one official, the magazine mentioned al-Qaida cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, the same man investigators believed was the inspiration behind the 2009 Fort Hood massacre.


probably lots of people stock their hotel rooms with gunpowder, firearms, ammunition and al -Qaida magazines on their way to cause "tragedies":uhuh:

Agree, he certainly appears to have mental health issues. Do they ALL? That's a generalization you can't support with your facts.

-spence