O'bowma

[Swimmer]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

childish
1: of, relating to, or befitting a child or childhood
2: marked by or suggestive of immaturity and lack of poise

naive
1: marked by unaffected simplicity : artless , ingenuous
2: deficient in worldly wisdom or informed judgment


Let's leave vague complaints out. I'm curious for concrete examples of him being childish and naive.

Nothing vague at all in what I posted if you listened to any of his speeches. The new admininstration thinks that they can make a perfect world through words and legislation and it wont happen. Thank you for putting up the meanings of those two words I used. It should be more clear to you now.

Spence the Somalians have no respect for us or our might either. I didn't finish the post and hit enter. I was tired and realized what I had done and chose not to edit and go to bed.

I don't think we should storm the lifeboat. Waiting them out will be difficult as well, because the Somalians are used to living on nothing everyday and surviving. We should be closer than several hundred yards. If some of the Somali compatriots choose to join in and bring more hostages the whole situation will be more out of control than what it is.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Swimmer

Spence the Somalians have no respect for us or our might either. I didn't finish the post and hit enter. I was tired and realized what I had done and chose not to edit and go to bed.

So what's the point?

-spence

[Swimmer]

Originally Posted by spence

So what's the point?

-spence

They remember how they kicked our ass in Mogadishu Spence. They don't fear or respect us. A navy destroyer is sitting a short distance away from that life boat and it is not the least bit intimidating. They would die for less given the chance.

I appologize for comparing JohhnyD to you.

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by Swimmer

They remember how they kicked our ass in Mogadishu Spence.

So, again, how does that relate back to Obama?
this is not a new relationship. I think we could nuke a town and they won't fear us; desperate people are often brave or foolhardy...

[Swimmer]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

So, again, how does that relate back to Obama?
this is not a new relationship. I think we could nuke a town and they won't fear us; desperate people are often brave or foolhardy...

OBama is president, thats why. The buck stops here. He has been president since January and he is still blaming someone else for all his problems. I don't see that as being mature. At what point in the liberals sense of things does what he does actually reflect on OBama and his appointments. At what point does it stick to him, or are those suits made of teflon he wears? What he has said to the world so far hasn't changed anything has it? It falls back on OBama just the way it did on Bush, Clinton, Bush41, Reagan..... Or just because OBama is president the rules change back, and it doesn't have anything to do with how the entire world, or us, views our leaders. I'll see this forum in the fall after my Vineyard trip. Too much to do.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by Swimmer

OBama is president, thats why. The buck stops here. He has been president since January and he is still blaming someone else for all his problems. I don't see that as being mature. At what point in the liberals sense of things does what he does actually reflect on OBama and his appointments. At what point does it stick to him, or are those suits made of teflon he wears? What he has said to the world so far hasn't changed anything has it? It falls back on OBama just the way it did on Bush, Clinton, Bush41, Reagan..... Or just because OBama is president the rules change back, and it doesn't have anything to do with how the entire world, or us, views our leaders. I'll see this forum in the fall after my Vineyard trip. Too much to do.

Obama focuses on anything but the economy and Conservatives drag him across the coals because he hasn't fixed the economy in 3 months of office.

It was Obama's call to send the Navy ships to the scene. How exactly was he suppose to prevent the situation from happening??

By your logic, because Bush was President at the time, 9/11 was Bush's fault.

[scottw]

c'mon JD...we all know that 9/11 was Clinton's fault...

Bama gave the finger several times during the campaign, that was very childish...
ordered pizza from 850 miles away...childish
whines evertime he's criticized...childish
apologizes for others to elevate himself...childish
sent the Oval Office bust of Churchill back to England...childish
hasn't gotten the kids their puppy yet...stupid


there's plenty to list...got my own things to do...I just think he's an a-hole...he continually proves it...

[spence]

Originally Posted by Swimmer

They remember how they kicked our ass in Mogadishu Spence. They don't fear or respect us. A navy destroyer is sitting a short distance away from that life boat and it is not the least bit intimidating. They would die for less given the chance.

I appologize for comparing JohhnyD to you.

I think you're just trying to reverse engineer the situation to make a point that's idiological and not realistic. These people in Somalia are so numb to violence and carnage that they don't seem to fear anything. The notion that their behavior is shaped by a perceived US weakness is silly, they have a profitable business going and to date haven't had anyone really squeeze them.

How is a destroyer supposed to intimidate them anyway? Without the hostage the destroyer wouldn't be there. There's little to nothing the destroyer can do while the hostage is on the boat, that's why the FBI in involved with the negoiation.

-spence

[TheSpecialist]

The latest outrage is the very word ‘terrorism’ has been banned by the Obama administration and replaced by the phrase ‘man caused disasters’. I kid you not.
SPIEGEL: ‘Madame Secretary, in your first testimony to the US Congress as Homeland Security Secretary you never mentioned the word “terrorism.” Does Islamist terrorism suddenly no longer pose a threat to your country?’
Janet Napolitano, President Obama’s new Homeland Security Secretary: ‘Of course it does. I presume there is always a threat from terrorism. In my speech, although I did not use the word “terrorism,” I referred to “man-caused” disasters. That is perhaps only a nuance, but it demonstrates that we want to move away from the politics of fear toward a policy of being prepared for all risks that can occur.’
Obviously, Obama plans on taking the United States back to a pre 9/11 mentality in dealing with the threat of Islamic terrorism. When one can’t even use the word ‘terrorism’ to describe terrorist incidents, something is seriously wrong.

[spence]

Originally Posted by TheSpecialist

The latest outrage is the very word ‘terrorism’ has been banned by the Obama administration and replaced by the phrase ‘man caused disasters’. I kid you not.

I'd like you to please find me something concrete that asserts the word "terrorism" has been banned. I doubt you will...

The context of the interview remark in question was that the DHS has to be prepared for all kinds of disasters, and that the Obama Administration doesn't intend to pepper their prepared remarks with "9/11" and "terrorism" every third word in an attempt to scare the hell out of everyone like the Bush Administration seemed to do.

There are thousands of blog rants on this topic and not a single one of them that I read actually forms a conclusion.

Last week at the airport I noticed the official Security Threat was still at ORANGE or "A HIGH CHANCE OF TERROR ATTACK".

High chance? You think I'm going to get on the effing plane if I think there's really a HIGH chance of attack?

-spence

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

I'd like you to please find me something concrete that asserts the word "terrorism" has been banned. I doubt you will...
-spence

you must have missed this in your daily talking points from the administration...it's weeks old...get up to speed..

"terrorist" has also been banned...we're now referring to them as "justifiably angry victims of American arrogance"

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by Swimmer

Nothing vague at all in what I posted if you listened to any of his speeches. The new admininstration thinks that they can make a perfect world through words and legislation and it wont happen. Thank you for putting up the meanings of those two words I used. It should be more clear to you now.

More clear? It's more clear that you just throw out terms like childish and naive and don't really have actual points to support the comments.

"Nothing vague at all in what I posted if you listened to any of his speeches."
This line is exactly my point. Conservatives throw out terms and labels but then beat around the bush when it comes to supporting them.

I don't think you can provide me a single credible reason as to how he's been "childish."

[Swimmer]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

More clear? It's more clear that you just throw out terms like childish and naive and don't really have actual points to support the comments.

"Nothing vague at all in what I posted if you listened to any of his speeches."
This line is exactly my point. Conservatives throw out terms and labels but then beat around the bush when it comes to supporting them.

I don't think you can provide me a single credible reason as to how he's been "childish."

O'Bama is naive if he thinks he has gained any respect from the europeans leaders, not the protesters, because of his negative Bush rhetoric in the last two weeks. If you don't think so you show me how he has gained respect.

My postings aren't any more or less vague than yours or anyone elses. Everyone writes broad ambiguous statements here about every little thing. If I think he is naive/childish, you prove me otherwise. Childish is putting up the meanings of the two words I used to describe O'Bama and asking me to clarify what I said. I don't have anything to prove to you or anyone else. Anyone can sit here and be a Spence clone and critique everyones postings. Go for it JohhnyD. Prove to me O'Bama isn't childish and naive and I'll post a mea culpa.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by Swimmer

O'Bama is naive if he thinks he has gained any respect from the europeans leaders, not the protesters, because of his negative Bush rhetoric in the last two weeks. If you don't think so you show me how he has gained respect.

My postings aren't any more or less vague than yours or anyone elses. Everyone writes broad ambiguous statements here about every little thing. If I think he is naive/childish, you prove me otherwise. Childish is putting up the meanings of the two words I used to describe O'Bama and asking me to clarify what I said. I don't have anything to prove to you or anyone else. Anyone can sit here and be a Spence clone and critique everyones postings. Go for it JohhnyD. Prove to me O'Bama isn't childish and naive and I'll post a mea culpa.

I wasn't asking for clarification. I was asking for an example, which you couldn't provide.

The difference in most of my posts aren't some regurgitation of something I heard on the radio or FoxNews, like many people around here. When I post something, it's pretty clear when I'm stating fact (because I support it with examples) and when I'm stating an opinion.

Nothing childish putting up the definitions. Wanted to make sure any examples you provided included how Obama is "marked by or suggestive of immaturity", because I don't think there are any.

[Swimmer]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

I wasn't asking for clarification. I was asking for an example, which you couldn't provide.

The difference in most of my posts aren't some regurgitation of something I heard on the radio or FoxNews, like many people around here. When I post something, it's pretty clear when I'm stating fact (because I support it with examples) and when I'm stating an opinion.

Nothing childish putting up the definitions. Wanted to make sure any examples you provided included how Obama is "marked by or suggestive of immaturity", because I don't think there are any.

I chose not to. What I said is readily apparent to just about anyone.