regulator 0 #1 December 14, 2011 Mr. President, Mr. President...what are you going to do? The burning question for most Americans since the 2008 election has been, what is the "change" -- that candidate Barack Obama promised us -- going to look like? I was suspicious when I heard Mr. Obama say that he wanted to fundamentally change America because I think we have great fundamentals like, life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, equality, a free enterprise system, a constitution that allows us to right our wrongs, etc. I never thought we needed fundamental change anywhere but in Washington, D.C. The good hard-working folks all over this great nation have always done just fine when Washington stops over burdening them with taxes and regulations. It’s not our fundamentals that need changing it’s our incidentals like our tax code and our restrictions on business as well as our out of control spending on entitlement programs and our misguided attempts to save snail darters and spotted owls to the degree that we harm people’s ability to earn a living. President Obama’s promise of change has proven to be nothing more than the same old Washington left wing, progressive, social-engineering that has brought our economy to the brink of Depression yet again. The only change is, it’s President Obama doing it instead of one of the other usual suspects. He is, however, the most divisive public servant that I have personally ever seen and that’s a change. He has also spent more of our money in less time than any other president in history and that’s a change. He makes no attempt to be the president of all the people and that’s different because others in the past have at least pretended from time to time. He ignores Congress and finds the Constitution out of date and limiting to his ability to do whatever he wants whenever he wants, but Mr. President, that’s what the founding fathers had in mind. I guess you forgot what you learned in school. So now the questions have been clearly answered as to what he’s going to do: He is going to throw extravagant parties at the White House, play golf regularly, vacation often on Martha’s Vineyard or Hawaii with the beautiful people, take Air Force One across America on fund raising trips, buy multi-million dollar presidential buses made in Canada for him to ride in while he goes out and makes speeches about creating jobs in America, apologize for America ad nauseum and make speeches. -- Lord will the man ever stop with the speeches? President Obama was only been trained to be elected and he’s been very good at it…so far. He knows how to smile, talk in a smooth manner, look concerned and read what someone else wrote for him on a TelePrompter. Yes, we know now exactly what he’s going to do for the next year or so but I wonder what he’s going to do after inauguration Day in January of 2013. Actually I really don’t wonder because I really don’t care but I know exactly what I’m going to do if President Obama isn't reelected... CELEBRATE! http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/12/12/only-thing-president-obama-has-been-trained-for/?intcmp=obnetwork Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
regulator 0 #2 December 14, 2011 I remember that speech...about all the change that was supposed to happen...other than some 'thoughts' about what to do rather than actually doing anything I'd say I'd prefer Nixon over this candidate. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wayneflorida 0 #3 December 14, 2011 "I wonder what he’s going to do after inauguration Day in January of 2013." He will have the potential to be a very rich ex-president. Probably in area of 250 million of potential assets. He will be on the teat of many corporations (the evildoers) and foundations Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreece 190 #4 December 14, 2011 QuoteYears in...where is that 'change' again? I already told you guys...first black president in U.S history...that's all.Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
regulator 0 #5 December 14, 2011 Perhaps he's going to hand everyone a penny when this is all said and done and say...here's your 'change'! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreece 190 #6 December 14, 2011 Quote Perhaps he's going to hand everyone a penny when this is all said and done and say...here's your 'change'! Actually, the money line on Obama is -200!Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
frequentfaller 0 #7 December 14, 2011 i dont think presidents can change much. there is too many career politicians in the government. entire government needs to be phased out. anyody wants to be in govt take IQ/skills identification test. background check - no felonies put in lottery system. same govt setup, just random peep. instead of empty promises to win electionsBorn ok 1st time. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreece 190 #8 December 14, 2011 Quotei dont think presidents can change much. there is too many career politicians in the government. entire government needs to be phased out. anyody wants to be in govt take IQ/skills identification test. background check - no felonies put in lottery system. same govt setup, just random peep. instead of empty promises to win elections We shouldn't need to do all that if voters took the time to be responsible... In the meantime, I'm just gonna continue making money off the candidates you people pick...I get good odds on my amoney for america being so damn predictable.Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mirage62 0 #9 December 15, 2011 What drives me nuts is some of the people here that supported and support Obama so strongly that he can do no wrong. Three years, it's STILL all Bushes fault and NOW our presidents grand plan is to run on class warfare. THAT is going to be his crowning achievment and what will _ I'm afraid - be what last. He is or president, I wish him no harm, I respect the office but jeez.....Kevin Keenan is my hero, a double FUP, he does so much with so little Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,122 #10 December 15, 2011 I wasn't one who said he could do no wrong, and he hasn't been the "savior" of much of anything. However, while fiscally this has been pretty disastrous (although one can't know what would have happened without all that stimulus), we do, in fact, have a start at a way of getting more people systematic access to health care, we are getting out of Iraq, and we're no longer seen by quite as many people as being warmongering. The economic woes really were and are serious, and really did start before Obama; whether he made them better or worse is still being evaluated (and will be for decades -- people still disagree whether the response to the Great Depression was the right one). Given the current "all or anothing" (aka "my way or the highway") approach to two-party politics, that constitutes some level of change. Obviously there's disagreement as to whether it's positive or negative, but I really don't think economic conditions would have been much better right now under McCain. Whether his administration would be setting them up to be better is also doubtful, but we can't really know that. Until an administration is willing to piss off its base and [tax them/give them fewer services], we're not going to get out of the financial mess. Just as Bush wanted us to have a war without anyone actually having to sacrifice anything they weren't willing to, most politicians still want to be able to lead us out of this fiscal mess without anyone giving anything up. One problem with making poor people take most of the brust of austerity measures is that you impact so many more of them for the same impact -- and then you still have citizens with the same needs, that just aren't being addressed. Welfare isn't the right answer, but just telling them to go find work when the labor market is radically different from what it was 50 years ago is also unrealistic. Might as well tell young jumpers to go to an Army Surplus store to get a $50 cheapo if they really want to jump. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #11 December 15, 2011 >3 Years in...where is that 'change' again? ======================== 'It's Finished': Last of U.S. Soldiers Leaving Iraq PHOTO: Soldiers reunite with family after returning from Iraq By MARTHA RADDATZ Dec. 14, 2011 Camp Victory, once the site of Saddam Hussein's former palace, is a military ghost town now. A base where 70,000 Americans once lived, the base was eerie and barren as the last of the U.S. troops departed Iraq this week with a one-way ticket. Army Pfc. Joseph Kelley, who was 11 when the war began in 2003, smiled wide as he patrolled Baghdad presumably for the last time today. He wasn't the only one. Across the world, in Fort Hood, military families waited anxiously for the return of their loved ones. Five-year-old Scottie Mathews, clutching his "papa bear," had been counting the days for the return of his father, Army Staff Sgt. Ferren Mathews. Across town, Raitasha Green and her three children also waited patiently, as did Jennifer Smitt. Mathews, Sgt. First Class Larry Green and Staff Sgt. James H. Courter are part of one of the last units to leave Iraq. Among them, they boast 11 tours of the war-torn country. For Courter, 28, the final departure from Iraq marked the closure of a long and turbulent decade. "I made a promise to myself… [that] I'm going to finish it," Courter, Smitt's husband, said of his commitment to join the military to fight terrorists. "It's personal to me, you know. What's been lost here and what's been gained here, it's close to my heart. You know, too many people gave too much so I'm actually honored to be here and be the last unit out of Iraq." ========================== Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #12 December 15, 2011 Quote>3 Years in...where is that 'change' again? ======================== 'It's Finished': Last of U.S. Soldiers Leaving Iraq PHOTO: Soldiers reunite with family after returning from Iraq By MARTHA RADDATZ Dec. 14, 2011 Camp Victory, once the site of Saddam Hussein's former palace, is a military ghost town now. A base where 70,000 Americans once lived, the base was eerie and barren as the last of the U.S. troops departed Iraq this week with a one-way ticket. ========================== Made possible by the SOFA agreement signed by Bush.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
winsor 186 #13 December 15, 2011 QuoteQuote>3 Years in...where is that 'change' again? ======================== 'It's Finished': Last of U.S. Soldiers Leaving Iraq PHOTO: Soldiers reunite with family after returning from Iraq By MARTHA RADDATZ Dec. 14, 2011 Camp Victory, once the site of Saddam Hussein's former palace, is a military ghost town now. A base where 70,000 Americans once lived, the base was eerie and barren as the last of the U.S. troops departed Iraq this week with a one-way ticket. ========================== Made possible by the SOFA agreement signed by Bush. So, you admit it is all Bush's fault! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #14 December 15, 2011 QuoteWe shouldn't need to do all that if voters took the time to be responsible...Quote We are as responsible as we can be when it comes to electing goobermint peoples. We have to pick the lesser of the evils at election time. But, yes, we fail even at that more often than not. We're stoopid enough to re-elect Odrama. Wait and see.My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Butters 0 #15 December 15, 2011 Quotehave a start at a way of getting more people systematic access to health care, I disagree. Quotewe are getting out of Iraq, Did we not already have plans to get out of Iraq? Quoteand we're no longer seen by quite as many people as being warmongering. Did we not increase our military involvement in the middle east (Afghanistan, Libya, etc...)?"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #16 December 15, 2011 QuoteDid we not increase our military involvement in the middle east (Afghanistan, Libya, etc...)? No, no...it's only warmongering if it's a *Republican* that does it.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites wmw999 2,122 #17 December 15, 2011 QuoteI disagree.Fine. I disagree with you.QuoteDid we not already have plans to get out of Iraq?There have been many plans. This one is being executed.QuoteDid we not increase our military involvement in the middle east (Afghanistan, Libya, etc...)?I didn't say we reduced our involvement. However, we're in Libya as part of a force that was put together and asked us -- kind of like how we were asked into Kuwait in 1990, and Afghanistan, unfortunate as it is, was always more justified than Iraq. There was no real justification for our going into Iraq, and there are plenty of people out there who are on record as having said that all along. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SkyDekker 1,122 #18 December 15, 2011 QuoteDid we not increase our military involvement in the middle east (Afghanistan, Libya, etc...)? Possibly, but warmongering would be based on perceived motivation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #19 December 15, 2011 Quote Did we not already have plans to get out of Iraq? Remember McCain talked about staying there for a 100 years if necessary. And didn't we have plans to kill Bin Laden for a long time too? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites frequentfaller 0 #20 December 15, 2011 QuoteQuotei dont think presidents can change much. there is too many career politicians in the government. entire government needs to be phased out. anyody wants to be in govt take IQ/skills identification test. background check - no felonies put in lottery system. same govt setup, just random peep. instead of empty promises to win elections QuoteWe shouldn't need to do all that if voters took the time to be responsible... either choice is the same. democrap or repuke needs to be flushedBorn ok 1st time. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SStewart 13 #21 December 15, 2011 QuoteQuote Did we not already have plans to get out of Iraq? Remember McCain talked about staying there for a 100 years if necessary. And didn't we have plans to kill Bin Laden for a long time too? McCain was on TV this very morning talking about how surrender was a big mistake and that it was just a campaign stunt by Obama. He also went on and on about WMD and the other same ridiculous bullshit that was proven to be a big lie years ago. What a fool, that stupid war is finally over and he still won't let it go.Onward and Upward! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #22 December 16, 2011 'It's Finished': Last of U.S. Soldiers Leaving Iraq PHOTO: Soldiers reunite with family after returning from Iraq By MARTHA RADDATZ Dec. 14, 2011 Camp Victory, once the site of Saddam Hussein's former palace, is a military ghost town now. A base where 70,000 Americans once lived, the base was eerie and barren as the last of the U.S. troops departed Iraq this week with a one-way ticket. Army Pfc. Joseph Kelley, who was 11 when the war began in 2003, smiled wide as he patrolled Baghdad presumably for the last time today. He wasn't the only one. *** That article is adorable, but how do you explain the buddies of mine who just left to go to Iraq for 8 months? We are still there, just like we were still combat troops when the name was changed to OND. I was there when that change happened and there was no difference from one day to the next. I had the same mission, the same ROE, and received the same commander's intent. Decreasing the footprint in numbers while maintaining forces that can accomplish just as much with far fewer number is not ending a war, its hiding it so you can gain political fodder. We are just as engaged as ever, only with fewer numbers.History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites chemfx 0 #23 December 18, 2011 A few letters come to mind NDAA! this is the change he was hinting at. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NW-e7z7S6VI&feature=youtube_gdata_player Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,400 #24 December 18, 2011 >That article is adorable, but how do you explain the buddies of mine who just left to go >to Iraq for 8 months? Same way one can explain two friends of mine who went to Iraq in 1987, I imagine. War is not the only reason one goes to Iraq (although fortunately it is no longer the reason.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DrewEckhardt 0 #25 December 19, 2011 Quote Mr. President, Mr. President...what are you going to do? Record prosecutions for felony re-entry (he almost matched Bush 43's career total in his first three years!), Goldman-Sachs employees in key cabinet roles so the financial industry is well-represented, increases in GSE mortgage fees to make private industry more competitive, limited increases in Government paid health insurance, etc. It's nice to have a real conservative in the oval office not like that liberal bed-wetter Bush 43 pushing a progressive agenda with stuff like Medicare Part D and anti-gun crap like his executive order banning import of pre-1994 regular capacity magazines. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 1 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
Butters 0 #15 December 15, 2011 Quotehave a start at a way of getting more people systematic access to health care, I disagree. Quotewe are getting out of Iraq, Did we not already have plans to get out of Iraq? Quoteand we're no longer seen by quite as many people as being warmongering. Did we not increase our military involvement in the middle east (Afghanistan, Libya, etc...)?"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #16 December 15, 2011 QuoteDid we not increase our military involvement in the middle east (Afghanistan, Libya, etc...)? No, no...it's only warmongering if it's a *Republican* that does it.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,122 #17 December 15, 2011 QuoteI disagree.Fine. I disagree with you.QuoteDid we not already have plans to get out of Iraq?There have been many plans. This one is being executed.QuoteDid we not increase our military involvement in the middle east (Afghanistan, Libya, etc...)?I didn't say we reduced our involvement. However, we're in Libya as part of a force that was put together and asked us -- kind of like how we were asked into Kuwait in 1990, and Afghanistan, unfortunate as it is, was always more justified than Iraq. There was no real justification for our going into Iraq, and there are plenty of people out there who are on record as having said that all along. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,122 #18 December 15, 2011 QuoteDid we not increase our military involvement in the middle east (Afghanistan, Libya, etc...)? Possibly, but warmongering would be based on perceived motivation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #19 December 15, 2011 Quote Did we not already have plans to get out of Iraq? Remember McCain talked about staying there for a 100 years if necessary. And didn't we have plans to kill Bin Laden for a long time too? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
frequentfaller 0 #20 December 15, 2011 QuoteQuotei dont think presidents can change much. there is too many career politicians in the government. entire government needs to be phased out. anyody wants to be in govt take IQ/skills identification test. background check - no felonies put in lottery system. same govt setup, just random peep. instead of empty promises to win elections QuoteWe shouldn't need to do all that if voters took the time to be responsible... either choice is the same. democrap or repuke needs to be flushedBorn ok 1st time. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SStewart 13 #21 December 15, 2011 QuoteQuote Did we not already have plans to get out of Iraq? Remember McCain talked about staying there for a 100 years if necessary. And didn't we have plans to kill Bin Laden for a long time too? McCain was on TV this very morning talking about how surrender was a big mistake and that it was just a campaign stunt by Obama. He also went on and on about WMD and the other same ridiculous bullshit that was proven to be a big lie years ago. What a fool, that stupid war is finally over and he still won't let it go.Onward and Upward! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #22 December 16, 2011 'It's Finished': Last of U.S. Soldiers Leaving Iraq PHOTO: Soldiers reunite with family after returning from Iraq By MARTHA RADDATZ Dec. 14, 2011 Camp Victory, once the site of Saddam Hussein's former palace, is a military ghost town now. A base where 70,000 Americans once lived, the base was eerie and barren as the last of the U.S. troops departed Iraq this week with a one-way ticket. Army Pfc. Joseph Kelley, who was 11 when the war began in 2003, smiled wide as he patrolled Baghdad presumably for the last time today. He wasn't the only one. *** That article is adorable, but how do you explain the buddies of mine who just left to go to Iraq for 8 months? We are still there, just like we were still combat troops when the name was changed to OND. I was there when that change happened and there was no difference from one day to the next. I had the same mission, the same ROE, and received the same commander's intent. Decreasing the footprint in numbers while maintaining forces that can accomplish just as much with far fewer number is not ending a war, its hiding it so you can gain political fodder. We are just as engaged as ever, only with fewer numbers.History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites chemfx 0 #23 December 18, 2011 A few letters come to mind NDAA! this is the change he was hinting at. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NW-e7z7S6VI&feature=youtube_gdata_player Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,400 #24 December 18, 2011 >That article is adorable, but how do you explain the buddies of mine who just left to go >to Iraq for 8 months? Same way one can explain two friends of mine who went to Iraq in 1987, I imagine. War is not the only reason one goes to Iraq (although fortunately it is no longer the reason.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DrewEckhardt 0 #25 December 19, 2011 Quote Mr. President, Mr. President...what are you going to do? Record prosecutions for felony re-entry (he almost matched Bush 43's career total in his first three years!), Goldman-Sachs employees in key cabinet roles so the financial industry is well-represented, increases in GSE mortgage fees to make private industry more competitive, limited increases in Government paid health insurance, etc. It's nice to have a real conservative in the oval office not like that liberal bed-wetter Bush 43 pushing a progressive agenda with stuff like Medicare Part D and anti-gun crap like his executive order banning import of pre-1994 regular capacity magazines. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 1 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
SStewart 13 #21 December 15, 2011 QuoteQuote Did we not already have plans to get out of Iraq? Remember McCain talked about staying there for a 100 years if necessary. And didn't we have plans to kill Bin Laden for a long time too? McCain was on TV this very morning talking about how surrender was a big mistake and that it was just a campaign stunt by Obama. He also went on and on about WMD and the other same ridiculous bullshit that was proven to be a big lie years ago. What a fool, that stupid war is finally over and he still won't let it go.Onward and Upward! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GQ_jumper 4 #22 December 16, 2011 'It's Finished': Last of U.S. Soldiers Leaving Iraq PHOTO: Soldiers reunite with family after returning from Iraq By MARTHA RADDATZ Dec. 14, 2011 Camp Victory, once the site of Saddam Hussein's former palace, is a military ghost town now. A base where 70,000 Americans once lived, the base was eerie and barren as the last of the U.S. troops departed Iraq this week with a one-way ticket. Army Pfc. Joseph Kelley, who was 11 when the war began in 2003, smiled wide as he patrolled Baghdad presumably for the last time today. He wasn't the only one. *** That article is adorable, but how do you explain the buddies of mine who just left to go to Iraq for 8 months? We are still there, just like we were still combat troops when the name was changed to OND. I was there when that change happened and there was no difference from one day to the next. I had the same mission, the same ROE, and received the same commander's intent. Decreasing the footprint in numbers while maintaining forces that can accomplish just as much with far fewer number is not ending a war, its hiding it so you can gain political fodder. We are just as engaged as ever, only with fewer numbers.History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chemfx 0 #23 December 18, 2011 A few letters come to mind NDAA! this is the change he was hinting at. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NW-e7z7S6VI&feature=youtube_gdata_player Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #24 December 18, 2011 >That article is adorable, but how do you explain the buddies of mine who just left to go >to Iraq for 8 months? Same way one can explain two friends of mine who went to Iraq in 1987, I imagine. War is not the only reason one goes to Iraq (although fortunately it is no longer the reason.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrewEckhardt 0 #25 December 19, 2011 Quote Mr. President, Mr. President...what are you going to do? Record prosecutions for felony re-entry (he almost matched Bush 43's career total in his first three years!), Goldman-Sachs employees in key cabinet roles so the financial industry is well-represented, increases in GSE mortgage fees to make private industry more competitive, limited increases in Government paid health insurance, etc. It's nice to have a real conservative in the oval office not like that liberal bed-wetter Bush 43 pushing a progressive agenda with stuff like Medicare Part D and anti-gun crap like his executive order banning import of pre-1994 regular capacity magazines. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
