POTUS Announces Opening of Campaign

[soonercruiser]

So today, Obama and wife had a news conference to announce the "beginning" (ha, ha...beginning...) of his re-election campaign.

Just in case you didn't know, this is Carl Marx's Birthday!
HAPPY BIRTHDAY MARXISM!
(I'm sure it's just a coincidence.) :dispirited:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx

[Midtowner]

Anyone who talks about Obama and Marxism as being even tangentially related in so far as his presidency is concerned is not to be taken seriously.

[REDREX]

Anyone who talks about Obama and Marxism as being even tangentially related in so far as his presidency is concerned is not to be taken seriously.---I don't know Karl Marx is the Father of Socialism----

[SicEmBaylor]

Anyone who talks about Obama and Marxism as being even tangentially related in so far as his presidency is concerned is not to be taken seriously.

This is absolutely true, and it's such a pet peeve of mine that I'd like to strangle the person every time I hear it suggested. Obama certainly has socialistic tendencies, but people are evidently confused as hell as to the style of socialism that he seems to favor.

[SicEmBaylor]

---I don't know Karl Marx is the Father of Socialism----
I hope you're kidding.

[Skysooner]

I hope you're kidding.

Stupid is as stupid does...

[REDREX]

I hope you're kidding.---Not at all Karl Marx was one of the fathers of Socialism http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080717162913AAiHluC

[Sooner5030]

socialism, fascism, capitalism or whatever doesn't matter as long as you can sustain it. More than likely 2012 total tax revenue will be less than total mandatory spending. That means we could cut appropriations (military, DOT, DOE, DOEn, et al.) and still have a deficit. None of the candidates are talking about tax revenue increases, spending cuts, and the resulting calculated recession that would be prudent.

Instead we will hear about hope, fairness and a bunch of other crap while our government continues towards bankruptcy.

If we have have a recession pre-cuts/tax increases it is all over. A recession with +$1 trillion deficit spending will mean default is near. After default what gets cut?

we had so many years to correct this problem but wished it away.

[SicEmBaylor]

---Not at all Karl Marx was one of the fathers of Socialism http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080717162913AAiHluC
You didn't say Marx was "a" father of socialism...which is true -- you said he was "the" father of socialism...which is not true.

[SicEmBaylor]

For the record, Obama is simply continuing long standing US policy to a varying degree and with varying degrees of success. There is nothing fundamentally and philosophically different about Obama than previous Presidents. I personally believe that he's at least sympathetic to some of the basic tenants of communism, but his policies have not reflected those beliefs. The socialism that most closely resembles Obama's politics is not communism but fascism which is not fundamentally different than previous administrations from as far back as two generations ago.

The US Government has been more fascist than anything else for a very very long time.

[Chuck Bao]

For the record, Obama is simply continuing long standing US policy to a varying degree and with varying degrees of success. There is nothing fundamentally and philosophically different about Obama than previous Presidents. I personally believe that he's at least sympathetic to some of the basic tenants of communism, but his policies have not reflected those beliefs. The socialism that most closely resembles Obama's politics is not communism but fascism which is not fundamentally different than previous administrations from as far back as two generations ago.

The US Government has been more fascist than anything else for a very very long time.

True that. And there are a lot of very stupid name calling idiots on this board.

[Tulsa_Fireman]

The US Government has been more fascist than anything else for a very very long time.

This. Regardless of what either side of the aisle tells you or whatever mouthpiece on your radio channel of choice says.

[OU_Sooners75]

Man, can you imagine what this country will do when a white guy wins the POTUS in November?

[Mazeppa]

May 6, 2012
Reading the Contempt of Socialists
By Bruce Deitrick Price

What, if any, is the connection between illiteracy and ideology?

George Orwell, our greatest political sociologist, has some ideas. He is the master explainer of governance, power, totalitarianism, education, and the dynamics of class warfare. It's an ugly picture.

In his seminal essay, "Ignorance Is Strength," Orwell lays down the iron rule of history: "Throughout recorded time, and probably since the end of the Neolithic Age, there have been three kinds of people in the world[:] High, Middle, and Low."

Orwell cynically notes that the Middle always campaign for power by promising the Low that they will be moved toward the top. In fact, if the Middle are able to seize power, they establish themselves as the High, the Low are crushed, and that's the end of the story until the next Middle become powerful enough to start another cycle.

Orwell concludes: "As soon as they have reached their objective, the Middle thrust the Low back into their old position of servitude, and themselves become the High."

Many observers would say, especially with Obama in the White House, that we are witnessing an attempted coup by the current Middle -- intellectuals, academics, ideologues, journalists, thinkers, and talkers (i.e., people who feel entitled to run the world because they are so smart). This hungry Middle wants to take power from the bankers, tycoons, entrepreneurs, and industrialists -- the movers and organizers who have run the world for several centuries.

But let's focus on the Low -- can they improve their lives by siding with the Middle in this ongoing coup attempt? Will the Middle, this time, actually try to lift up the Low?

Orwell's essay is depressing because he sees no hope that the Low can ever improve their condition. In his view, the Middle are always liars, manipulators, and exploiters, despite their honeyed promises.

Why is Orwell so sure that the Middle always abuse the Low? And can we find proof of Orwell's pessimistic vision?

One bit of history strikes me forcefully in this context. When the Progressives in this country took control of public education, fighting under the banner of John Dewey's socialist ideas, you might have expected -- or hoped -- that they would use their new power to lift the lower classes to some higher place. They did not.

They had power by the 1930s, and their first big move was to throw phonics out and introduce Whole Word, which requires children to memorize words as diagrams. It seems to me a particularly revealing move. From that time forward, our public schools have churned out more than 50 million functional illiterates. We have one million dyslexics, with some estimates much higher. We have a vast decline in culture, in general knowledge, and in ordinary common sense. (If people still have any of that, it's arguably because they are constantly interacting with movies and TV; most of this so-called entertainment is more sophisticated than most of the so-called education served up in our public schools.)

And all this decline was accomplished by a simple device: our collectivist educators, having climbed their way to the top, refused to let the peasants learn to read.

To me, it's shocking. But there's little doubt that that is what happened, and it is confirmation of George Orwell's cynicism. He said that the Middle, when they got power, would never give the suckers an even break. That's what we have seen in the public schools of our country for the last 80 years. What the Low get is dumbing down and illiteracy.

The reason for using Whole Word never seemed to have anything to do with helping the Low. A cursory look at literacy statistics proves that this method is a bust and generally hurts the slower students most. The real agenda always seemed to be making sure that the Low stay low, and in creating an economic and cultural disaster zone where the Middle can sign up new recruits and continue their assault on the High. Indeed, the Middle use their control of education primarily to wean the Low away from supporting the High. Education today is a war of propaganda against the status quo, until the High give up. Isn't this what we are seeing?

The Education Establishment pushed Look-say, Sight Words, Whole Language, and Balanced Literacy (all these are the same thing under different names) in an endless rolling barrage unlike anything seen since the trench warfare of World War I. Phonics had to be obliterated. Whole Word had to be enforced, by whatever claims, weird jargon, repackaging, and outright lies were necessary.

So here we are in 2012, and children are still forced to memorize their Dolch words in first grade. What are Dolch words? They are the more common words, named after Edward Dolch, one of the pioneers of Whole Word. Although language and jargon have been changed, the essential gimmick does not change. Kids were made to memorize sight-words in 1935, and they are made to do the same today.

Children still end up reading less fluently, knowing less, and making for a less educated, less independent people.

So I propose that reading theory -- perhaps I should say false reading theory -- provides a miniature diorama of George Orwell's analysis. Our Middle are Socialists, and once they were on the move circa 1931, they showed, at least in education, their true colors. I think it's fair to say that Obama and his far-left friends would like to move to the top. Obviously, this is bad news for the High. But this essay is about the Low. The warning is clear. The Low should not be so foolish as to expect much of anything. The people at the bottom will be kept there, ignorant, on welfare, and for sure hardly literate.

In short, the peasants never get an even break.

In 1911, G. Stanley Hall, one of John Dewey's mentors, went so far as to extol illiteracy: "It is possible, despite the stigma our bepedagogued age puts upon this disability, for those who are under it not only to lead a useful, happy, virtuous life, but to be really well-educated in many other ways."

And so we see that in reading -- theory, methods, and results -- we can read the contempt of Socialists.

Is there any hope? Only if the entire society rejects the blandishments of our Education Establishment. Personally, I think it's correct to conclude that nothing they endorse can lead to education, if they can help it, nor to literacy. All the phonics experts say they can teach virtually every child to read in the first grade. That's what we need. Anything less concedes the battlefield to our ruthless, on-the-march Middle.

Bruce Deitrick Price is an author, artist, and education reformer. He founded Improve-Education.org in 2005; this site explains theories and methods.

[SicEmBaylor]

Man, can you imagine what this country will do when a white guy wins the POTUS in November?

There's no need. A white guy isn't going to win in November.

[OULenexaman]

Well Ben had a word or two for him yesterday....

By Benjamin Smith, U.S. Navy SEAL

President Barack Hussein Obama – STOP using the Navy SEALS as a campaign

ploy. Because with all due respect, (what little I have for you), you do NOT

speak for me.

You have a movie about SEALS within the past year trying to identify with me,

with the navy SEALS, and with anything that might improve your polling

numbers…and yet it is all a sham to hide a weak un-American man desperate to

claim the victories of others for his own.

You Sir are trying to take the credit for what the American People have

achieved in killing Bin Laden. Your use of the SEALs accomplishment as a

campaign slogan is nothing less than despicable. I, as a former Navy SEAL do not

accept your taking credit for Osama Bin Laden’s death. The American Military

accomplished that feat.

Yet now that it is useful, you Mr. President, continue to refer to the event

as if it were YOU and you alone which accomplished the worthy task of slaying

one of America’s greatest enemies. You say “I directed”, “I Continued”, “My

Intelligence Community”, “My national security team”, “I determined that I had

enough….”, “My direction…”

Yet reliable sources continue to report that not only did you attempt to stop

or delay Bin Laden’s demise, you did not even leave the golf course for the

situation room until 20 minutes before SEAL Team 6 took out Osama Bin Laden.

Even the clothes you wore in the situation room betray this fact. This is a

Commander in Chief? A man who takes credit for actions largely taken while he

was out golfing?

We men who have taken the oath, say ENOUGH. You do not speak for me, a former

Navy SEAL, or any one of the league of men whom I have earned the right to be

among. You are simply a man running for an office. Yet you behave as a

glory-hoarding ruler. You campaign to be our leader, yet in reality you wish to

be our Master.

The American people are the ones who got Bin Laden… You did Not! We have

fought wars and slugged it with Vast Terror Organizations to get to the man you

say YOU killed. The United Sates of America has won you a title sir and you have

spent the last three years trying to beg, borrow and bow as you GIVE IT ALL

AWAY. You just happened to be president of the USA when WE THE PEOPLE got Osama

Bin Laden. We do not see you as heroic or stoic, we see you as the guy who let

America Go. We got fat and weak and you gave it all away. That is your credit –

you bow to foreign leaders and pander to the press. You do not represent me as a

Military Man. You do not represent me as a SEAL. You do not represent me as an

AMERICAN!

You do not speak for me or any American military man because though you may

now be Commander in Chief, you are not the man to whom we can point our sons and

say “This is the American dream, this is American exceptionalism, this is what I

wish for your future”, because you Sir are NONE of these things. You Sir, are

the antithesis of American Exceptionalism. Your idols are Saul Alinksi and Karl

Marx and your revolutionary dreams and anti-American ideals poison your every

policy. Your every action betrays the fact that in your soul you do not

understand what it is to be an American, not what America truly is. Your agenda

from the beginning has been to get rid of and kill everything that is and ever

was American. You who so easily dismisses America’s greatness and bows to

foreigners… YOU DO NOT SPEAK FOR ME. YOU DO NOT SPEAK FOR THE NAVY SEALS. YOU DO

NOT SPEAK FOR THE MILITARY MAN AND you SHALL NOT claim as your prize that which

you have not earned. The Navy SEALS are NOT a campaign slogan to be bantered

about for play. Nor are our accomplishments, including the demise of Osama Bin

Laden, yours to claim.

So you DO NOT speak for me. And I will not stand for your use and abuse of my

brethren the SEALS.

For Liberty,

Benjamin Smith

[badger]

Funny things I noticed on the morning news involving the campaign:

- The BLUE side of the campaign sign says "FORWARD." The RED side of the campaign sign says "Not Back."
-Pics of the NOT full campaign sites are getting posted by the Romney side, saying that people are not as enthusiastic about Obama as they were four years ago. Mind you, these are the nosebleed, upstairs seats. It's not like there's sparse crowds at these events.

So, lulz are around. This election is kind of like 96, where you know ahead of time who is going to win (Clinton over Dole), but feel bad because the guy that has no chance isn't really a bad guy and wouldn't make a bad president. Alas, the year his name came up was the year he had no chance of winning. Here's hoping that the same thing happens to Hillary when her "time" finally arrives. My guess is 2016, because Joe Biden seems pretty unelectable.

[pphilfran]

I think this is a whole different animal than 96...

There is still too much crap left in the world economy...somebody sneezing in the wrong direction could cause a crash....

At the current time it looks like he will probably get reelected....but it isn't a slam dunk by any means....

[Curly Bill]

I think this is a whole different animal than 96...

There is still too much crap left in the world economy...somebody sneezing in the wrong direction could cause a crash....

At the current time it looks like he will probably get reelected....but it isn't a slam dunk by any means....

Racist! You only said this because he's the only black guy that can't slam dunk!

[OULenexaman]

and he blames Bush for that too...........

[Soonerjeepman]

hmmm, that's why mo has been on every late night talk show within the last few weeks...riighhtt...

just hope people have woken up to his BS...

[soonercruiser]

The US Government has been more fascist than anything else for a very very long time.

You guys should really not mix smoking pot and drinking at the same time!
(Please stick you collective heads back in the sand!)

Wait until you guys see the OWGov treaties that Obama and Clintin are negotiating!

[soonercruiser]

Well Ben had a word or two for him yesterday....

By Benjamin Smith, U.S. Navy SEAL

President Barack Hussein Obama – STOP using the Navy SEALS as a campaign

ploy. Because with all due respect, (what little I have for you), you do NOT

speak for me.

You have a movie about SEALS within the past year trying to identify with me,

with the navy SEALS, and with anything that might improve your polling

numbers…and yet it is all a sham to hide a weak un-American man desperate to

claim the victories of others for his own.

You Sir are trying to take the credit for what the American People have

achieved in killing Bin Laden. Your use of the SEALs accomplishment as a

campaign slogan is nothing less than despicable. I, as a former Navy SEAL do not

accept your taking credit for Osama Bin Laden’s death. The American Military

accomplished that feat.

Yet now that it is useful, you Mr. President, continue to refer to the event

as if it were YOU and you alone which accomplished the worthy task of slaying

one of America’s greatest enemies. You say “I directed”, “I Continued”, “My

Intelligence Community”, “My national security team”, “I determined that I had

enough….”, “My direction…”

Yet reliable sources continue to report that not only did you attempt to stop

or delay Bin Laden’s demise, you did not even leave the golf course for the

situation room until 20 minutes before SEAL Team 6 took out Osama Bin Laden.

Even the clothes you wore in the situation room betray this fact. This is a

Commander in Chief? A man who takes credit for actions largely taken while he

was out golfing?

We men who have taken the oath, say ENOUGH. You do not speak for me, a former

Navy SEAL, or any one of the league of men whom I have earned the right to be

among. You are simply a man running for an office. Yet you behave as a

glory-hoarding ruler. You campaign to be our leader, yet in reality you wish to

be our Master.

The American people are the ones who got Bin Laden… You did Not! We have

fought wars and slugged it with Vast Terror Organizations to get to the man you

say YOU killed. The United Sates of America has won you a title sir and you have

spent the last three years trying to beg, borrow and bow as you GIVE IT ALL

AWAY. You just happened to be president of the USA when WE THE PEOPLE got Osama

Bin Laden. We do not see you as heroic or stoic, we see you as the guy who let

America Go. We got fat and weak and you gave it all away. That is your credit –

you bow to foreign leaders and pander to the press. You do not represent me as a

Military Man. You do not represent me as a SEAL. You do not represent me as an

AMERICAN!

You do not speak for me or any American military man because though you may

now be Commander in Chief, you are not the man to whom we can point our sons and

say “This is the American dream, this is American exceptionalism, this is what I

wish for your future”, because you Sir are NONE of these things. You Sir, are

the antithesis of American Exceptionalism. Your idols are Saul Alinksi and Karl

Marx and your revolutionary dreams and anti-American ideals poison your every

policy. Your every action betrays the fact that in your soul you do not

understand what it is to be an American, not what America truly is. Your agenda

from the beginning has been to get rid of and kill everything that is and ever

was American. You who so easily dismisses America’s greatness and bows to

foreigners… YOU DO NOT SPEAK FOR ME. YOU DO NOT SPEAK FOR THE NAVY SEALS. YOU DO

NOT SPEAK FOR THE MILITARY MAN AND you SHALL NOT claim as your prize that which

you have not earned. The Navy SEALS are NOT a campaign slogan to be bantered

about for play. Nor are our accomplishments, including the demise of Osama Bin

Laden, yours to claim.

So you DO NOT speak for me. And I will not stand for your use and abuse of my

brethren the SEALS.

For Liberty,

Benjamin Smith

http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn212/SoonerCruiser_photos/Political/ObamaspikesBinLaden.jpg

A picture is worth a thousand words!
:surprise:

[Midtowner]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/ff/Bush_mission_accomplished.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7b/George_W._Bush_walks_with_Ryan_Phillips_to_Navy_On e.jpg/465px-George_W._Bush_walks_with_Ryan_Phillips_to_Navy_On e.jpg

Really.. if you're angry about Obama taking credit for OBL's death and were silent during the above fiasco, well... /thread.

And it may be worth noting that Bush got us into two wars we didn't need to get into, Bush took credit for Hussein's death (oh yes, I'm aware of the cut/paste going around where Obama's use of the first person is highlighted, but actually, aside from having the troops there in the first place, Bush didn't actually authorize anything in particular which ended in the capture of Hussein).

It might also be worth noting that Obama has cleaned up the messes left by the prior administration and has not thrown a 'merica orgy on an aircraft carrier.

[soonercruiser]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/ff/Bush_mission_accomplished.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7b/George_W._Bush_walks_with_Ryan_Phillips_to_Navy_On e.jpg/465px-George_W._Bush_walks_with_Ryan_Phillips_to_Navy_On e.jpg

Really.. if you're angry about Obama taking credit for OBL's death and were silent during the above fiasco, well... /thread.

And it may be worth noting that Bush got us into two wars we didn't need to get into, Bush took credit for Hussein's death (oh yes, I'm aware of the cut/paste going around where Obama's use of the first person is highlighted, but actually, aside from having the troops there in the first place, Bush didn't actually authorize anything in particular which ended in the capture of Hussein).

It might also be worth noting that Obama has cleaned up the messes left by the prior administration and has not thrown a 'merica orgy on an aircraft carrier.

Come on you LW lemming!
Bush never turned war events into campaign ads or press conferences!
And, when Bush spoke to the country he gave the troops (not corpsmen) the credit!
Obama thinks that he is the center of the Universe!

Come to think of it, Obama doesn't have the "right" to wear any military uniform....kinda like Clinton!
He is the Commander-in-Chief.....but he doesn't deserve any respect for service to the country, or can even fake being a pilot!

Some people serve the country.
Others just serve themselves!

[Midtowner]

Come on you LW lemming!
Bush never turned war events into campaign ads or press conferences!
And, when Bush spoke to the country he gave the troops (not corpsmen) the credit!
Obama thinks that he is the center of the Universe!

Come to think of it, Obama doesn't have the "right" to wear any military uniform....kinda like Clinton!
He is the Commander-in-Chief.....but he doesn't deserve any respect for service to the country, or can even fake being a pilot!

Some people serve the country.
Others just serve themselves!

LOL. See the above photos.

[SicEmBaylor]

You guys should really not mix smoking pot and drinking at the same time!
(Please stick you collective heads back in the sand!)


If "in the sand" is where one goes to learn the basic differences between various socialist economic models then I'd invite you to join me as it would clearly benefit your understanding of Obama, politics, and American history.

There are any number of people on this site that would be more than happy to explain the difference, but you're one of those guys that isn't going to let facts get in the way of your stubborn stranglehold on ignorance.

[SicEmBaylor]

I cannot stand Obama, but I also cannot stand hypocrisy and/or inconsistency.

It is absolutely bewildering to me that people are upset that Obama is politicizing a military action he himself authorized. Let me drop some shocking knowledge on some of you people: Obama is a P-O-L-I-T-I-C-I-A-N. Politicizing is what they do. There is nothing at all shocking about this, but some of you are so quick to act overly self-righteous on the point that you fail to grasp the blatant hypocrisy involved here.

You people know and understand that the Bush administration and the GOP politicized the War on Terror for almost a decade...a decade! What the hell is wrong with some of you? Seriously? Are you that comitted to the GOP machine that you willingly allow yourself to look like an ignorant and hypocritical jackass just so you can point your finger at the "black communist" and say "OMG! OMG! THAT POLITICAN IS POLITICIZING A POLITICAL ACT INVOLVING A US MILITARY STRIKE! OMG HOW DARE HE! HOW DARE HE!"

I weep for the Republic.

[sappstuf]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/ff/Bush_mission_accomplished.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7b/George_W._Bush_walks_with_Ryan_Phillips_to_Navy_On e.jpg/465px-George_W._Bush_walks_with_Ryan_Phillips_to_Navy_On e.jpg

Really.. if you're angry about Obama taking credit for OBL's death and were silent during the above fiasco, well... /thread.

And it may be worth noting that Bush got us into two wars we didn't need to get into, Bush took credit for Hussein's death (oh yes, I'm aware of the cut/paste going around where Obama's use of the first person is highlighted, but actually, aside from having the troops there in the first place, Bush didn't actually authorize anything in particular which ended in the capture of Hussein).

It might also be worth noting that Obama has cleaned up the messes left by the prior administration and has not thrown a 'merica orgy on an aircraft carrier.

If by "cleaned up", you mean following Bush's withdrawal plan from Iraq to the letter, then you are correct.

Obama's accomplishments have come from following and continuing the Bush doctrine. There really is no way to deny that.

http://www.terrellaftermath.com/Cartoon%20Archive/May%202012%20Archive/DominoesBinLaden2WebCR-05_03_12.jpg

[okie52]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/ff/Bush_mission_accomplished.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7b/George_W._Bush_walks_with_Ryan_Phillips_to_Navy_On e.jpg/465px-George_W._Bush_walks_with_Ryan_Phillips_to_Navy_On e.jpg

Really.. if you're angry about Obama taking credit for OBL's death and were silent during the above fiasco, well... /thread.

And it may be worth noting that Bush got us into two wars we didn't need to get into, Bush took credit for Hussein's death (oh yes, I'm aware of the cut/paste going around where Obama's use of the first person is highlighted, but actually, aside from having the troops there in the first place, Bush didn't actually authorize anything in particular which ended in the capture of Hussein).

It might also be worth noting that Obama has cleaned up the messes left by the prior administration and has not thrown a 'merica orgy on an aircraft carrier.

2 wars we didn't need to get into? Which 2 were those?

[Midtowner]

2 wars we didn't need to get into? Which 2 were those?

Iraq and Afghanistan.

[Midtowner]

If by "cleaned up", you mean following Bush's withdrawal plan from Iraq to the letter, then you are correct.

Obama's accomplishments have come from following and continuing the Bush doctrine. There really is no way to deny that.


You mean following Petreaus' plan for maintaining a permanent presence in those countries in an 'overwatch' role? Not hardly. And since Obama hasn't preemptively attacked countries like Iran and North Korea, i.e., countries which actually already have or are working on WMDs, I'm pretty sure that shows a departure from the Bush Doctrine.

[sappstuf]

You mean following Petreaus' plan for maintaining a permanent presence in those countries in an 'overwatch' role? Not hardly. And since Obama hasn't preemptively attacked countries like Iran and North Korea, i.e., countries which actually already have or are working on WMDs, I'm pretty sure that shows a departure from the Bush Doctrine.

Yeah, Obama would never sign an agreement keeping troops in Afghanistan until 2024 in an "overwatch role"... Oh wait... He did that last week. Do you watch the news?

When did Bush preemptively attack Iran and North Korea?

[Midtowner]

Folks are throwing around the phrase "Bush Doctrine." I only assumed you knew what it meant.

[sappstuf]

Folks are throwing around the phrase "Bush Doctrine." I only assumed you knew what it meant.

What folks? I haven't seen "Bush Doctrine" mentioned once in this thread... When did Bush attack those two countries?

Now lets get back to where you were saying Bush was dumb for having considered an "overwatch" where he would leave troops in a country and hinted that Obama had changed that. And I pointed out that Obama had just signed a 10 year agreement with Afghanistan until 2024 for that exact thing.

Go on...

[Ton Loc]

You guys should really not mix smoking pot and drinking at the same time!
(Please stick you collective heads back in the sand!)



I'm going back to put my head in the sand, but only white pristine GOP sand. Not that communist/socialist/black sand Obama wants to cover are beaches in.


I cannot stand Obama, but I also cannot stand hypocrisy and/or inconsistency.

It is absolutely bewildering to me that people are upset that Obama is politicizing a military action he himself authorized. Let me drop some shocking knowledge on some of you people: Obama is a P-O-L-I-T-I-C-I-A-N. Politicizing is what they do. There is nothing at all shocking about this, but some of you are so quick to act overly self-righteous on the point that you fail to grasp the blatant hypocrisy involved here.

You people know and understand that the Bush administration and the GOP politicized the War on Terror for almost a decade...a decade! What the hell is wrong with some of you? Seriously? Are you that comitted to the GOP machine that you willingly allow yourself to look like an ignorant and hypocritical jackass just so you can point your finger at the "black communist" and say "OMG! OMG! THAT POLITICAN IS POLITICIZING A POLITICAL ACT INVOLVING A US MILITARY STRIKE! OMG HOW DARE HE! HOW DARE HE!"

I weep for the Republic.

Damn your common sense.

This place is the black hole that sucks the common sense out of the world but leaves the ignorance behind.
Good times.

[okie52]

Iraq and Afghanistan.

Afghanistan...W started that war????

What would the smart response have been....doing nothing????

[Midtowner]

What folks? I haven't seen "Bush Doctrine" mentioned once in this thread... When did Bush attack those two countries?

You haven't read the thread and don't know what the Bush Doctrine is. Google is your friend.


Now lets get back to where you were saying Bush was dumb for having considered an "overwatch" where he would leave troops in a country and hinted that Obama had changed that. And I pointed out that Obama had just signed a 10 year agreement with Afghanistan until 2024 for that exact thing.
Go on...

We're out of Iraq. No troops there except in an advisory capacity. That wasn't Petraeus' plan. We're going to be marginally present in Afghanistan. Had the Bush doctrine continued, we'd have preemptively invaded several other companies who were looking like threats. Instead, we've made good use of drones, targeted strikes and diplomacy.

[okie52]

You mean following Petreaus' plan for maintaining a permanent presence in those countries in an 'overwatch' role? Not hardly. And since Obama hasn't preemptively attacked countries like Iran and North Korea, i.e., countries which actually already have or are working on WMDs, I'm pretty sure that shows a departure from the Bush Doctrine.

No, he chose that big nuker Libya. Bravo.

[sappstuf]

You haven't read the thread and don't know what the Bush Doctrine is. Google is your friend.



We're out of Iraq. No troops there except in an advisory capacity. That wasn't Petraeus' plan. We're going to be marginally present in Afghanistan. Had the Bush doctrine continued, we'd have preemptively invaded several other companies who were looking like threats. Instead, we've made good use of drones, targeted strikes and diplomacy.

You are right, it wasn't Patraeus' plan... It was Bush's plan. On December 14th, 2008 President Bush signed the security agreement with Iraq that would have all U.S. combat forces out of Iraq by December 31st, 2011.

All Obama did was not screw it up and followed it to the letter.

Google is your friend.

Flying drones gathering intelligence over a sovereign country's airspace without their knowledge is preemptive and could be considered an act of war. The fact that you don't seem to realize this means you aren't near as smart in these matters as you think you are. Bush was the one that started drones and targeted strikes anyway, all Obama did was expand on them.

Which means he isn't doing anything new... Well. Obama did say he could target and kill US citizens with drones without a trial.. Bush never did that.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Anyone who talks about Obama and Marxism as being even tangentially related in so far as his presidency is concerned is not to be taken seriously.

Why not? Its true. O'Bummer = Karl Marx lite

[SicEmBaylor]

Why not? Its true. O'Bummer = Karl Marx lite

Really? How so?