Why did it take BO so long??

Were exactly is the apology in this??

"I took office at a time when many around the world had come to view America with skepticism and distrust. Part of this was due to misperceptions and misinformation about my country. Part of this was due to opposition to specific policies, and a belief that on certain critical issues, America has acted unilaterally, without regard for the interests of others. This has fed an almost reflexive anti-Americanism, which too often has served as an excuse for our collective inaction.

Or this?? I dont see a single word saying I APOLOGISE OR I AM SORRY

Democracy cannot be imposed on any nation from the outside. Each society must search for its own path, and no path is perfect. Each country will pursue a path rooted in the culture of its people, and – in the past – America has too often been selective in its promotion of democracy."

Or are you saying that America has the right to impose it's will on other countries, disregard the intrest of others?
If so then I would imagine that your countries founding fathers would be turning in there graves in disgust.

 

The Obama Apologize For America Tour Continues With A Performance In Dresden
By Michael Eden

Do you have a relative who served the United States during World War II? Perhaps you yourself served?
I hope you are suitably ashamed for what you and your country did. Because your president has used the omnipotent power of his sacrosanct hindsight to declare that your nation was involved in war crimes. Remember when the Obama DHS said we should be afraid of our combat veterans? Apparently it’s not just the ones returning home now; it goes back to at least World War II.

Be ashamed. Be very ashamed. Shame, after all, is the hip new way to be “patriotic.” The more ashamed you are to be an American, the better an American you are. That’s change you can believe in.
We are now beginning to uncover the true extent of the Bush/Cheney evil. Apparently, these two men (who are of course worse than Hitler) spent hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars secretly building a time machine so they could bomb Dresden and Tokyo – and drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki – all in a Machiavellian campaign to blame the Democrats who were running the country during World War II for their war crimes.

We have Barack Obama to thank for reminding us yet again how genuinely evil America truly is – particularly when he can place the blame for that evil on everyone but himself and those who share his radical leftist ideology.

We can now join Michelle Obama in having never been proud of America until Barack Obama became president.

 

Or are you saying that America has the right to impose it's will on other countries, disregard the intrest of others?
If so then I would imagine that your countries founding fathers would be turning in there graves in disgust.[/QUOTE]

Believe me those guys started spinning long ago?

 

You aint seen nothing yet after baracko gets done with healthcare , cap and tax and another stimulus filled with democtat porkulus you will wish that gas was 5 buck a gallonus.

 

1. ‘Hillary Was Right’ About Obama and Terror

During the 2008 presidential race Hillary Clinton’s campaign warned that if a national security crisis arose with Barack Obama in the White House and the “red phone” alerting him rang at 3 a.m., he could not be trusted to adequately respond.

“Turns out Hillary Rodham Clinton was right all along,” declared Charles Hurt, Washington, D.C. bureau chief for the New York Post.

Hillary’s warning in a campaign ad suggested that an Obama White House would so downplay the threat posed by terrorism that “the government’s focus would shift away from the harsh and determined tactics used to protect the homeland,” Hurt wrote on Friday, adding, “Instead, Obama would turn his attention to becoming more popular in the world and stress negotiations over hardball tactics.”

vThat attitude has trickled down to all levels of the government responsible for national security, according to Hurt.

On Thursday, President Obama sought to calm Americans’ fears about the terror threat following the attempted bombing of a plane on Christmas Day. But “there wasn’t much to see in the White House other than bungling of previous bungling,” according to Hurt, as the administration rescheduled Obama’s address to the country several times.

At 8 a.m., the White House said the president would speak at 1 p.m. Then at 1 p.m., the announcement came that he would deliver his address at 3 p.m. At 3 p.m., the White House said Obama would speak at 4:30 p.m. He took the podium at 4:34 p.m.

Hurt cited Obama’s trip to Cairo last year to address the Muslim world, when he said it is “part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear,” and opined, “If you have time for such nonsense, then you are not spending enough time thinking about how to thwart this enemy.

“But it is not like we weren’t warned by Hillary Clinton.”

Another 2008 presidential candidate, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, declared Friday morning that the Fort Hood shootings and the Christmas Day bombing incident show Obama and his advisers have been “fundamentally wrong” in their approach to the war on terror.

Giuliani, who was New York's mayor when terrorists struck on Sept. 11, 2001, told MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” viewers that the president has tried to let “political correctness trump reality.”

Giuliani said the Obama administration came into power with the belief that President George W. Bush’s response to the 9/11 attacks was unnecessarily severe, and had alienated America’s potential allies abroad.

“They’d gone too far, Bush had overreacted, we make the war on terror worse if we emphasize it too much — this is what they truly believed,” Giuliani said. “But they were fundamentally wrong.”

 

One shouldnt get drunk and then try to post. We heard all that. Good of you to bring it up though.

 

Craig, it is better to not post and be thought a fool, than to post and remove all doubt. You seem to always do the latter.

 

Go chase yourself

 

Exhibit A

 

ok guy's stop the personal stuff

 

Another county heard from. Oh thats right, youre the great defender of jth. I can see why your lack of control keeps you out of the upper echelon where you are employed.

 

Craig your the one that cant discuss anything with anybody without getting personal. You remind me of the little yorkie dog always yap..yap..yap with no bite(substance).

 

I see you are not denying it. How about responding to my post on the Harry Reid topic or are you too scared to touch that one. Keep on cluckin craig.

 

Feel better now? Did you fold your arms in satisfaction after you wrote this? How clever you must feel. I responded just for you. And just so you feel as if you have to struggle to come up with another sharp retort; I dont always read dim-witted posts, but since you desperately need attention I obliged you.

 

I see it took you a whole two weeks to ignore your new years resolution of not making personal attacks. Since you are the most intellectually inferior member on this forum it makes sense that a


like you would do anything to avoid discussing the actual issues. The fact that you don't read dim-witted posts explains why your posts are so stupid. And I certainly don't need attention from a clown like you!

 

I am sorry, lehigh, but that post demeans you. Because "they" make insulting posts in lieu of reasoning does not make similar posts in response any better. Because "they" choose to belittle themselves does not give anyone else the go ahead to join in.

FWIW, Craig a was the main reason I quit postiong a long time ago and probably will again - SOON!

 

Half the time Craig argues just to argue. Rarely do I see him trying to get to a factual point about anything. Don't know if he's liberal, ind., conservative or what. Mainly just an arguer that likes to hear himself talk on this forum. He poses no threat to my belief system and I agree that he's like the little Chihauhau, nipping at your ankles that you just can't shake.

The opposing side on this forum is about as affective as liberal talk radio. Maybe a little less. To me, the personal attacks and all the worn out arguments just take up screen space in between the actual content here.

 

From what I have seen, there is really no purpose to taking the high road on this forum. You have been gone for a little while. All that exists is personal attacks and lunatic ravings. There is no real debate. If Craig wants to engage in a never ending series of personal attacks, I am just childish enough to indulge him.

 

Let me see now. Whee have I heard that before?





Humm.






Oh! yes. I remember. ".......but his mommy lets him do/have/play with that...."

 

jth wrote yorkie not chihauhau