Our president isn't quite as advertised.

[Gan]

By KARL ROVE (http://online.wsj.com/search/search_center.html?KEYWORDS=KARL+ROVE&ARTICLESEARCHQUERY_PARSER=bylineAND)

Barack Obama inherited a set of national-security policies that he rejected during the campaign but now embraces as president. This is a stunning and welcome about-face.

For example, President Obama kept George W. Bush's military tribunals for terror detainees after calling them an "enormous failure" and a "legal black hole." His campaign claimed last summer that "court systems . . . are capable of convicting terrorists." Upon entering office, he found out they aren't.

He insisted in an interview with NBC in 2007 that Congress mandate "consequences" for "a failure to meet various benchmarks and milestones" on aid to Iraq. Earlier this month he fought off legislatively mandated benchmarks in the $97 billion funding bill for Iraq and Afghanistan.

Mr. Obama agreed on April 23 to American Civil Liberties Union demands to release investigative photos of detainee abuse. Now's he reversed himself. Pentagon officials apparently convinced him that releasing the photos would increase the risk to U.S. troops and civilian personnel.

Throughout his presidential campaign, Mr. Obama excoriated Mr. Bush's counterinsurgency strategy in Iraq, insisting it could not succeed. Earlier this year, facing increasing violence in Afghanistan, Mr. Obama rejected warnings of a "quagmire" and ordered more troops to that country. He isn't calling it a "surge" but that's what it is. He is applying in Afghanistan the counterinsurgency strategy Mr. Bush used in Iraq.

As a candidate, Mr. Obama promised to end the Iraq war by withdrawing all troops by March 2009. As president, he set a slower pace of drawdown. He has also said he will leave as many as 50,000 Americans troops there.

These reversals are both praiseworthy and evidence that, when it comes to national security, being briefed on terror threats as president is a lot different than placating MoveOn.org and Code Pink activists as a candidate. The realities of governing trump the realities of campaigning.
We are also seeing Mr. Obama reverse himself on the domestic front, but this time in a manner that will do more harm than good.

Mr. Obama campaigned on "responsible fiscal policies," arguing in a speech on the Senate floor in 2006 that the "rising debt is a hidden domestic enemy." In his acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention, he pledged to "go through the federal budget line by line, eliminating programs that no longer work." Even now, he says he'll "cut the deficit . . . by half by the end of his first term in office" and is "rooting out waste and abuse" in the budget.

However, Mr. Obama's fiscally conservative words are betrayed by his liberal actions. He offers an orgy of spending and a bacchanal of debt. His budget plans a 25% increase in the federal government's share of the GDP, a doubling of the national debt in five years, and a near tripling of it in 10 years.

On health care, Mr. Obama's election ads decried "government-run health care" as "extreme," saying it would lead to "higher costs." Now he is promoting a plan that would result in a de facto government-run health-care system. Even the Washington Post questions it, saying, "It is difficult to imagine . . . benefits from a government-run system."

Making adjustments in office is one thing. Constantly governing in direct opposition to what you said as a candidate is something else. Mr. Obama's flip-flops on national security have been wise; on the domestic front, they have been harmful.

In both cases, though, we have learned something about Mr. Obama. What animated him during the campaign is what historian Forrest McDonald once called "the projection of appealing images." All politicians want to project an appealing image. What Mr. McDonald warned against is focusing on this so much that an appealing image "becomes a self-sustaining end unto itself." Such an approach can work in a campaign, as Mr. Obama discovered. But it can also complicate life once elected, as he is finding out.

Mr. Obama's appealing campaign images turned out to have been fleeting. He ran hard to the left on national security to win the nomination, only to discover the campaign commitments he made were shallow and at odds with America's security interests.

Mr. Obama ran hard to the center on economic issues to win the general election. He has since discovered his campaign commitments were obstacles to ramming through the most ideologically liberal economic agenda since the Great Society.

Mr. Obama either had very little grasp of what governing would involve or, if he did, he used words meant to mislead the public. Neither option is particularly encouraging. America now has a president quite different from the person who advertised himself for the job last year. Over time, those things can catch up to a politician.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124286200693341141.html
__________________________________________________ _

Just because I know it will wire folks up...

[Xaerve]

I absolutely agree with him. The whole damned thing is fact-based analysis, so I don't really know what the bleeding liberals, or non-bleeding liberals can bitch about really.

I am a little perplexed by the Rove/Cheney verbal lashing today.. where the hell is W at??

[Parkbandit]

I absolutely agree with him. The whole damned thing is fact-based analysis, so I don't really know what the bleeding liberals, or non-bleeding liberals can bitch about really.

I am a little perplexed by the Rove/Cheney verbal lashing today.. where the hell is W at??

Cheney's speech was a good one today. I haven't read the transcript of Obama's yet.. but I'm sure he's apologizing and blaming Bush for something.

[ClydeR]

I absolutely agree with him. The whole damned thing is fact-based analysis, so I don't really know what the bleeding liberals, or non-bleeding liberals can bitch about really.

I am a little perplexed by the Rove/Cheney verbal lashing today.. where the hell is W at??

And I absolutely agree with you. When it comes to fact-based issues, why would anybody trust Obama over Rove/Cheney? If we learned anything from the time that Rove/Cheney were in office, it's that they are trustworthy. It's ridiculous that some people suggest otherwise. The people who say you can't trust Karl Rove are just ill informed and lazy. I could, but I'm not going to, point out time after time when people have accused Rove/Cheney or lying but it wasn't true. I can't think of any times when people have accused Obama of lying but it wasn't true. Ridiculous.

[Xaerve]

I don't respond to anonymous trolls usually, but I'll say this.

I never once claimed that Cheney/Rove were 100% trustworthy. I, instead, argued that Rove's position, explicitly, above is fact-based analysis.

Nice try though! Maybe you should read your own glorious liberal media that is dragging your Deity through the mud this morning. :)

[Bhuryn]

Our president isn't quite as advertised.

Sorta unnewsworthy isn't it? I mean this happens every 4-8 years =P.

[Parkbandit]

Our president isn't quite as advertised.

Sorta unnewsworthy isn't it? I mean this happens every 4-8 years =P.

You should actually read the article.. not just the title of the first post.

[Bhuryn]

You should actually read the article.. not just the title of the first post.

I did, theres nothing new and exciting. This happens every election in some varying degree of magnitude.

Obama is a bigger flip-flopper then normal? Who cares, theres far more deeply ingrained issues in Washington and the American people for the most part are as stupid as congress makes them out to be. Until that changes the President and everyone to follow will do this as they see fit with little to no repurcisions.

[Gan]

Our president isn't quite as advertised.

Sorta unnewsworthy isn't it? I mean this happens every 4-8 years =P.

That's not much solace for those who voted him into office with hope for change.

Oh wait...

[Bhuryn]

That's not much solace for those who voted him into office with hope for change.

Oh wait...

Yeah, unfortunatly at this point change in Washington is about as likely as a shovel winning a nobel prize.

[Parkbandit]

Yeah, unfortunatly at this point change in Washington is about as likely as a shovel winning a nobel prize.

Well an embellishing robot did in 2008... why not a shovel?

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40191000/jpg/_40191512_gore_gorebot300.jpg

[Danical]

http://207.199.174.56/img/KHbwvJZPVr_manbearpig.jpg

[Bhuryn]

Well an embellishing robot did in 2008... why not a shovel?


Because the only thing a

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_mzZNLLUt-y0/SVEfvWwnk0I/AAAAAAAAAZw/h0y4gGkmMis/s320/_shovels.jpg

Is good for is removing the

http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j71/sonny88_2006/shit.jpg

that piles up on the stairs of

http://sc94.ameslab.gov/TOUR/whitehouse.gif

[Parkbandit]

Because the only thing a

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_mzZNLLUt-y0/SVEfvWwnk0I/AAAAAAAAAZw/h0y4gGkmMis/s320/_shovels.jpg

Is good for is removing the

http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j71/sonny88_2006/shit.jpg

that piles up on the stairs of

http://sc94.ameslab.gov/TOUR/whitehouse.gif

Oh really?

http://www.ddponline.org/shovel.pdf

Uses of a Shovel
Consider the list of basic tools that have served mankind throughout history: (the ones we take for
granted, or return to in an emergency to sustain our lives) the knife, axe, rope, blanket, tent, table, shoe,
needle, awl, hat, backpack, money, writing tablet, bowl, bottle, basket, bag, cooking pot, compass, fishhook,
wheeled cart, fire-making implements, etc. To this list belongs that marvelous tool, the shovel. It is found
among the oldest artifacts of man, and yet is also found in the hands of millions of laborers today. Neither
its form nor basic uses have changed much in all the millennia of human civilization and technological
advance. The modern shovel is superior to its antecedents simply by virtue of its better steel and
economical mass production. Though often overlooked by modern collectors of gadgetry, it remains a
fundamental personal possession, simple in its strength, lifesaving in its capability. Those skilled in its use
are admired as they work, both for their feats of accomplishment and technique, and for the sculpting of
their bodies which the exercise provides.
Good form in shoveling, as in lifting, dancing, or martial arts, is to move from the hips, do most of
the work with your legs, not your back, and maintain good posture. This avoids fatigue and injury. A
skilled workman respects what a shovel can and cannot do, cares for his tools, and rarely breaks one.
Shovels are not all alike. Pick a good one. It should be full sized but not heavier than necessary.
Moderately curved blades are better than strongly curved ones, thicker steel better than thin, and not too
much angle between the handle and the blade. Stay away from fiberglass, rubberized handles, gimmicks,
and thin soft-iron oriental products. Hickory or similar hardwood handles remain the best, and it is essential
that the grain of the handle be perpendicular to the plane of the blade, else it will break. It should have a
comfortable, balanced feel to it. After choosing the style, always pick the straightest, strongest-looking
handle in the bunch. The cost of a good shovel is insignificant compared to its value, and is not a reliable
indicator of functionality, so do not look at price. It is no more extravagant to have several shovels than to
have several pair of shoes. The following categories of shovel usage are merely suggestive:
Normal Uses
Extracting a stuck vehicle from mud, sand, or snow. Spreading gravel on an icy road.
Lifting a spare tire onto lug bolts, when adequate brute force is not available. Clearing away cactus.
Digging a footing. Leveling a yard. Uncovering water or sewer lines for remedy, or digging new ones.
Marking, tilling, furrowing, weeding, or irrigating a garden. Removing weeds and shrubs too big to hoe.
Planting trees. Tamping dirt around a new post. Opening a gopher hole to set a trap.
Mixing cement or mortar in a wheel barrow. Reaching a peach or an apple on a high branch.
Killing a rattlesnake. (Smack it hard in the middle with the flat of the blade. This will momentarily stun the
snake so he can’t dodge. Then quickly turn the blade over and chop his head off. Bury the head,
which remains dangerous to pets and children.)
Killing packrats. (Dig them out, then same technique as snake.)
Camping
Clearing a spot for a tent or picnic blanket. ‘Ditching’ a tent. As a walking stick. Leveling camp table legs.
Prying up stubborn tent pegs. Burying large rocks to serve as tent anchors, (instead of tent pegs, which
don’t work well in sand.) Clearing a site for campfire, dig a fire pit, put out embers ejected from campfire.
Managing a cooking fire, distributing coals on and around a Dutch oven.
Harvesting squaw wood (dead lower limbs) for the campfire, and chopping it up into kindling.
Potential Emergency Uses
Cutting ramps in a stream bank to make passable a washed-out road. As an oar. Well padded, a crutch.
Digging a garbage pit, fire pit, well, solar still, expedient fallout shelter, snow cave, grave, or latrine.
Cleaning up fiberglass insulation, broken glass, contaminants and spilled garbage. As a leg splint.
Digging for grubs and tubers to eat. Personal defense against man or beast. Herding fish into a net.
An improvised tent pole or ridgepole. Putting out grass fires. To reach a floundering swimmer.
Breaking out a window in house or car, to rescue or escape. Enlarge a spring or seep to fill water containers.
In an emergency a shovel could break through most light-weight doors and walls. Probing for hazards.
Noise maker: bang on a rock to frighten an animal or signal for help. A flagpole. Air rescue marker maker.
Clean up after a flood, or make a levee to mitigate one. Source of steel for flint-and-steel fire-making.
Lifting a live power line off an electrocution victim. A probe and steadying pole for crossing swift streams.
Opening a barrel cactus to access its moisture.

[Bhuryn]

That has got to be the most random list of shit I have ever seen.

They probably use something more like:

http://www.oll.state.oh.us/content_files_user/96616/4154.jpg

to clear the steps outside Congress

[Ignot]

Is it me or does that poop look like it's in HD?

[Parkbandit]

That has got to be the most random list of shit I have ever seen.


Tell me about it. I googled "uses of a shovel" and laughed when I saw what they put on that list.

[RichardCranium]

Who cares, theres far more deeply ingrained issues in Washington and the American people for the most part are as stupid as congress makes them out to be. Until that changes the President and everyone to follow will do this as they see fit with little to no repurcisions.

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k15/troydenh/FACEPALM.jpg

[Back]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124286200693341141.html
__________________________________________________ _

Just because I know it will wire folks up...

Not really. I’ve been for Obama since he announced his candidacy and even I knew that when he got into office things weren’t going to magically change over night. Its the most complex and delicate position in the world and there is so much going on behind the scenes that no one knows about.

Of course being such a vocal critic of the Bush administration in his congress years he would not be privy to the inner workings of things. Then, when the curtain is lifted, he has to use his judgment to maintain then proceed. Remember, he has only been in the highest office less than 6 months. I trust he will make the best decisions he can to keep everything together while advancing us on a path that he envisions is best for the country.

This post will certainly be called apologetic but it is very realist. I agree with some of what Rove said but I disagree with our constant need to point at enemies and finger blame on each other when we should be working together towards progress and a better life for everyone.

[Parkbandit]

This post will certainly be called apologetic but it is very realist. I agree with some of what Rove said but I disagree with our constant need to point at enemies and finger blame on each other when we should be working together towards progress and a better life for everyone.

I don't think I've heard a single policy speech, given by Obama, that didn't somehow blame the Bush administration or Republicans for something. I don't remember a single President in my lifetime that has done this to this extent.

[Mtenda]

I don't think I've heard a single policy speech, given by Obama, that didn't somehow blame the Bush administration or Republicans for something. I don't remember a single President in my lifetime that has done this to this extent.

Cause and effect.

I don't know of a single president in the history of America that fucked up as much as Bush did.

[Stanley Burrell]

I think Obama had a take-it-to-the-house approach concerning Afghanistan and Pakistan well before he was elected into office. It's one of the reasons I voted for him. Further pursuing The Taliban and the group of people who are responsible for actually attacking us is why Obama is a better man than Rove and making a better effort than the Bush II administration will have ever made. His "point" about flip-flopping by comparing troop deployment (in Afghanistan) is fine with me.

Rove trying to turn that into a flip-flop just makes lol. "Placating MoveOn.org and Code Pink" is a testament to what rhetorical crap this is, that's seriously the handbook of every liberal lulz.

Rove wouldn't know what to do about the economy either. It's been one of these unrealistic blame-placing games and ridiculous fix-it-now demands; of this administration, which is marked by a culture with a patience span of about 3 nanoseconds. I know the administration that was in office when this huge debt was racked up.

Ultimately, this is a classic Rove article speaking to those who will only agree with him.

[Back]

I don't think I've heard a single policy speech, given by Obama, that didn't somehow blame the Bush administration or Republicans for something. I don't remember a single President in my lifetime that has done this to this extent.

Yeah. Its endemic to our two party system. People I have talked to from countries with multi-party governments see ours as at least getting more done in a shorter period of time.

Somewhere along the line in our current history it became popular to call each other anti-American for disagreeing with this view or that. That never should have happened because what has made us great is our ability to work together.

[Parkbandit]

Cause and effect.

I don't know of a single president in the history of America that fucked up as much as Bush did.

I'm glad you used the phrase "I don't know".. since it's quite obvious you haven't a clue.

What's it like to go through life being blissfully ignorant?

[Parkbandit]

Yeah. Its endemic to our two party system. People I have talked to from countries with multi-party governments see ours as at least getting more done in a shorter period of time.

Somewhere along the line in our current history it became popular to call each other anti-American for disagreeing with this view or that. That never should have happened because what has made us great is our ability to work together.

No it isn't. Bush barely mentioned Clinton when he took office. Clinton didn't CONSTANTLY complain about the previous administration.. neither did Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon or Johnson. It's not the system.. it's Obama.

[Mtenda]

What's it like to go through life being blissfully ignorant?

That's a hilarious question sitting right above your sig. :wink:

[Parkbandit]

That's a hilarious question sitting right above your sig. :wink:

In Daniel's defense.. I think he was typing that on his iPhone.

[Stanley Burrell]

No it isn't. Bush barely mentioned Clinton when he took office. Clinton didn't CONSTANTLY complain about the previous administration.. neither did Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon or Johnson. It's not the system.. it's Obama.

No president, no matter how ultra-conservative they could have hypothetically been would have done what Bush Jr. did in Iraq. Bush II created this pink and purple polka-dotted glaring contrast that Obama can harp upon. It doesn't take time out of his (Obama's) presidential duties and, apparently, recounting past administration officials is getting Obama ratings. It's like being mad at a politician for playing politics, PB.

[Parkbandit]

Yeah. Its endemic to our two party system. People I have talked to from countries with multi-party governments see ours as at least getting more done in a shorter period of time.

Somewhere along the line in our current history it became popular to call each other anti-American for disagreeing with this view or that. That never should have happened because what has made us great is our ability to work together.

To further my point:

Results 1 - 10 of about 3,110,000 for obama blames bush

Results 1 - 10 of about 922,000 for bush blames clinton.

Results 1 - 10 of about 1,010,000 for Clinton blames bush

Results 1 - 10 of about 337,000 for Bush blames reagan.

Results 1 - 10 of about 882,000 for Reagan blames carter

Results 1 - 10 of about 889,000 for Carter blames ford

Results 1 - 10 of about 806,000 for Ford blames nixon.

Results 1 - 10 of about 1,060,000 for Nixon blames johnson

Results 1 - 10 of about 1,430,000 for Johnson blames Kennedy

And to narrow down the field even more:

Results 1 - 10 of about 2,240 for "Obama blames Bush"

Results 1 - 10 of about 334 for "Bush blames Clinton".

Results 1 - 10 of about 411 for "Clinton blames Bush"

Results 1 - 6 of 6 for "Bush blames Reagan"

Results 1 - 8 of 8 for "Reagan blames Carter".

Results 1 - 1 of 1 for "Carter blames Ford".

No results found for "Ford blames Nixon".

No results found for "Nixon blames Johnson".

No results found for "Johnson blames Kennedy".

And these were from Google.. a BLEEDING HEART LIBERAL company.

[Mtenda]

To further my point:

Results 1 - 10 of about 3,110,000 for obama blames bush

Results 1 - 10 of about 922,000 for bush blames clinton.

Results 1 - 10 of about 1,010,000 for Clinton blames bush

Results 1 - 10 of about 337,000 for Bush blames reagan.

Results 1 - 10 of about 882,000 for Reagan blames carter

Results 1 - 10 of about 889,000 for Carter blames ford

Results 1 - 10 of about 806,000 for Ford blames nixon.

Results 1 - 10 of about 1,060,000 for Nixon blames johnson

Results 1 - 10 of about 1,430,000 for Johnson blames Kennedy

And to narrow down the field even more:

Results 1 - 10 of about 2,240 for "Obama blames Bush"

Results 1 - 10 of about 334 for "Bush blames Clinton".

Results 1 - 10 of about 411 for "Clinton blames Bush"

Results 1 - 6 of 6 for "Bush blames Reagan"

Results 1 - 8 of 8 for "Reagan blames Carter".

Results 1 - 1 of 1 for "Carter blames Ford".

No results found for "Ford blames Nixon".

No results found for "Nixon blames Johnson".

No results found for "Johnson blames Kennedy".

And these were from Google.. a BLEEDING HEART LIBERAL company.

You just pretty much made my point. Perspective is a helluva a thing though.

I guess Obama is just a dick.

[Back]

No it isn't. Bush barely mentioned Clinton when he took office. Clinton didn't CONSTANTLY complain about the previous administration.. neither did Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon or Johnson. It's not the system.. it's Obama.

Well, in GWB’s case, he had nothing to criticize. In fact, all of them had nothing really to criticize about the other besides Reagan and yes he did mention it in his inaugural address.

[Mtenda]

Well, in GWB’s case, he had nothing to criticize. In fact, all of them had nothing really to criticize about the other besides Reagan and yes he did mention it in his inaugural address.

As politicians, they all have something to criticize to work for their image. W ran on a faith based platform coming right after Clinton's impeachment for lying under oath about his adultery. It was a hot sell at the time.

Obama certainly will overuse Bush's fuckups for his own image. But the numbers don't lie. Bush's fuckups are epic.

[Back]

To further my point:

...

And these were from Google.. a BLEEDING HEART LIBERAL company.

You just killed your point. But whatever.

I and many Americans are fine with openly criticizing the previous administration or any administration. I do not for one second think that Obama used that as a scheme to get elected. Most of us agreed. There is a better way and we believe that Obama is the man to take us that way.

[Parkbandit]

No president, no matter how ultra-conservative they could have hypothetically been would have done what Bush Jr. did in Iraq. Bush II created this pink and purple polka-dotted glaring contrast that Obama can harp upon. It doesn't take time out of his (Obama's) presidential duties and, apparently, recounting past administration officials is getting Obama ratings. It's like being mad at a politician for playing politics, PB.

It's true. It's playing right to the liberals who OMG I HATE GEORGE BUSH!!!!!!1111

But there has to be a time when Obama says that he isn't looking at the past and wants to look towards the future.. and actually means it.

[Parkbandit]

Well, in GWB’s case, he had nothing to criticize. In fact, all of them had nothing really to criticize about the other besides Reagan and yes he did mention it in his inaugural address.

I keep forgetting that Clinton was the perfect President and did everything correctly. DAMN MY MEMORY!!

And mentioning a previous administration in an inaugural address is a far cry from mentioning it in EVERY SINGLE POLICY SPEECH.

[Parkbandit]

You just killed your point. But whatever. How exactly did I kill my point that Obama criticises Bush more than any other President in recent years? You know it's not like golf scores.. right?



I and many Americans are fine with openly criticizing the previous administration or any administration. I do not for one second think that Obama used that as a scheme to get elected. Most of us agreed. There is a better way and we believe that Obama is the man to take us that way.

No doubt.. and when a Republican gets back into the office, I'm certain you will once again be openly critical. It should be a nice vacation for you in the meantime...

[Parkbandit]

BTW Backlash.. wtf are you doing with your name? It's fucked up now Brainiac.. unless this is what you were striving for:

http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e6/belike53/Dumbass.jpg

[Back]

No doubt.. and when a Republican gets back into the office, I'm certain you will once again be openly critical. It should be a nice vacation for you in the meantime...

My anger level over politics is extremely subdued compared to the past 8 years. Oddly, your anger level seems to be the same.

It illustrates my point when I posted...

dems: WTF?
repubs: NO U!

and now its...

repubs: WTF?
dems: LOL!

[Back]

How exactly did I kill my point that Obama criticises Bush more than any other President in recent years? You know it's not like golf scores.. right?

You used a google search to make a point about Obama that may or may not be true. But you contested my point that criticizing a previous administration is endemic in a two party system by saying “No it isn’t”.

You did further elaborate. Kudos.

[Back]

I keep forgetting that Clinton was the perfect President and did everything correctly. DAMN MY MEMORY!!

And mentioning a previous administration in an inaugural address is a far cry from mentioning it in EVERY SINGLE POLICY SPEECH.

Its over. I made you break out the ALLCAPS FURY!!! I R WINAR!!!!

[Parkbandit]

My anger level over politics is extremely subdued compared to the past 8 years. Oddly, your anger level seems to be the same.

Don't project. My anger level is always very low in regards to politics. That hasn't changed.

It's amusing to me how you spent 8 years so angry and now, suddenly, as if by miracle, it's extremely subdued. What exactly has changed in your life now that Obama is President? How exactly did Bush change your life for the past 8 years?

Yea.. this is me laughing at you again...

[Parkbandit]

You used a google search to make a point about Obama that may or may not be true. But you contested my point that criticizing a previous administration is endemic in a two party system by saying “No it isn’t”.

You did further elaborate. Kudos.

WTF?! Isn't it a tad bit early to be shitfaced? Let me summarize:

PB: Obama blames Bush in every policy speech
BL: It's the system.. every President does it.
PB: No, that isn't the system, that's Obama and only Obama.
PB: Oh, and here's "proof" with Google showing Obama lapping other Presidents over and over again.
BL: Thanks for proving my point
PB: WTF!?

[Gan]

Its over. I made you break out the ALLCAPS FURY!!! I R WINAR!!!!

Is it time for the special olympics already?

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll102/learningtewfly/ganalon-olympics.jpg

[Gan]

Not really. I’ve been for Obama since he announced his candidacy and even I knew that when he got into office things weren’t going to magically change over night. Its the most complex and delicate position in the world and there is so much going on behind the scenes that no one knows about.

Of course being such a vocal critic of the Bush administration in his congress years he would not be privy to the inner workings of things. Then, when the curtain is lifted, he has to use his judgment to maintain then proceed. Remember, he has only been in the highest office less than 6 months. I trust he will make the best decisions he can to keep everything together while advancing us on a path that he envisions is best for the country.


If only you gave Bush that same consideration - even in the beginning.

Serious question(s):

Is there a single post here on the PC where you have complimented Bush (genuine compliment - not loaded or backhanded) or are there posts from you dating back to the beginning of the first Bush term where you are on record for this type of consideration?
You will earn my surprise if you can answer in the affirmative for the first question. And you would earn some credibility if you an provide proof of the affirmative with regards to the second question.




This post will certainly be called apologetic but it is very realist. I agree with some of what Rove said but I disagree with our constant need to point at enemies and finger blame on each other when we should be working together towards progress and a better life for everyone.

Your wish seems mighty convenient since your candidate now sits in office. Where was this sentiment 4 years ago? 6 years ago?

[Back]

WTF?! Isn't it a tad bit early to be shitfaced? Let me summarize:

PB: Obama blames Bush in every policy speech
BL: It's the system.. every President does it.
PB: No, that isn't the system, that's Obama and only Obama.
PB: Oh, and here's "proof" with Google showing Obama lapping other Presidents over and over again.
BL: Thanks for proving my point
PB: WTF!?

Wrong.

I said it happens.

You said no.

No amount of your foolishness is ever going to amount to anything. Give it up already.

[Back]

If only you gave Bush that same consideration - even in the beginning.

Serious question(s):

Is there a single post here on the PC where you have complimented Bush (genuine compliment - not loaded or backhanded) or are there posts from you dating back to the beginning of the first Bush term where you are on record for this type of consideration?
You will earn my surprise if you can answer in the affirmative for the first question. And you would earn some credibility if you an provide proof of the affirmative with regards to the second question.




Your wish seems mighty convenient since your candidate now sits in office. Where was this sentiment 4 years ago? 6 years ago?

Do your research. :)

[Ignot]

My anger level is always very low in regards to politics.

Really? I can't even imagine what you would be like if your anger level was very high.

[Gan]

Do your research. :)

This answer confirms in as much as the searches that yielded nothing that would support that you have given Bush any level of consideration as you're asking others to do for Obama.

Grats on the fail.


Again.

[Methais]

Cause and effect.

I don't know of a single president in the history of America that fucked up as much as Bush did.

He's in office right now x10378947890740.

[Parkbandit]

Really? I can't even imagine what you would be like if your anger level was very high.

At least Backlash tries to actually make a political point.. something I could never accuse you of doing.

[Parkbandit]

Wrong.

I said it happens.

You said no.

No amount of your foolishness is ever going to amount to anything. Give it up already.

Wrong, Boy Blunder.

You said:


Its endemic to our two party system.

I said:


No it isn't. Bush barely mentioned Clinton when he took office. Clinton didn't CONSTANTLY complain about the previous administration.. neither did Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon or Johnson. It's not the system.. it's Obama.


No amount of your foolishness is ever going to change the facts and the actual truth. Give it up already.

[Ignot]

At least Backlash tries to actually make a political point.. something I could never accuse you of doing.

Whoa whoa lets bring the anger level down please.

[Back]

This answer confirms in as much as the searches that yielded nothing that would support that you have given Bush any level of consideration as you're asking others to do for Obama.

Grats on the fail.


Again.

My fail? This is you failing...


This may be the best thing this president has done. I haven’t corroborated with any other sources yet, but will be as the day progresses.

Bush says US to double Africa aid (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/in_depth/4638323.stm)

Thursday, 30 June, 2005, 14:30 GMT 15:30 UK

Bush says US to double Africa aid
President George W Bush has said the US will double its aid to Africa over the next five years.

Speaking ahead of next week's G8 summit in Scotland, Mr Bush said the world stood to benefit from prosperity and stability on the African continent.

Mr Bush said Africa's leaders must carry out reforms in order to achieve economic progress.

He also said there should be a new concern for environmental protection in the face of global warming.


Bush did raise AIDS relief to Africa. That was stellar. He was also not rabid, more sympathetic, about immigracion...

He, and Cheney, destroyed our economy. Tax break fat-cat contractors were laughing all the way to their off-shore bank accounts.

And quit with the 9-11 shit already. Ancient history. We’ve spent more money and lives than 9-11 ever cost us.


I agree with our president on immigration. Not his party, however.


And so on...

[Gan]

My fail? This is you failing...








And so on...

Then as per the tenets of my question, you have earned my surprise at you actually being of record for genuinely complimenting something that Bush has done.
:clap:

[Methais]

And quit with the 9-11 shit already. Ancient history. We’ve spent more money and lives than 9-11 ever cost us.

Yeah, because not taking the fight to the terrorists would have showed them what nice people we are and they would have just gone away on their own right?

It's nauseating how quickly some people forget.

http://thebiggestsecretpict.online.fr/nwo/wtc_impact2.jpg

[MrTastyHead]

AMERICA, FUCK YEAH!

http://alertedeye.files.wordpress.com/2007/02/girl.jpg

[Methais]

AMERICA, FUCK YEAH!

http://media.photobucket.com/image/america%20fuck%20yeah/mad_mouth/AmericaFuckYeah.jpg

Fixed.

[Methais]

AMERICA, FUCK YEAH!

http://i287.photobucket.com/albums/ll154/spinarooni226/AmericaFuckYeah.jpg

Fixed.

[Back]

Yeah, because not taking the fight to the terrorists would have showed them what nice people we are and they would have just gone away on their own right?

It's nauseating how quickly some people forget.

It’s also nauseating how people linked it to Iraq.

[Methais]

It’s also nauseating how people linked it to Iraq.

I apologize. I forgot that that makes it perfectly ok to so quickly forget the worst attack on our soil ever, referring to it as things like "ancient history".

My bad. I'll to speak from your point of view, starting now:

http://punditdad.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/wve-white-flag-260.jpg