Is Obama lying AGAIN???

Hey...I didn't write the song. It was written for school children in New Jersey so they can sing and honor B.O.

You didn't hear about this?

Watch it here:

 

You justify B.O.'s Mmm Mmm Mmm dithering (to quote Cheney) by accusing the past administration of doing something similar? You really are clueless...what happened to the "new kind of leader"? "Change"?

 

Ooops! Sorry! The lyrics are so bad I just assumed. No, I had not heard that school children were singing about Obama.

 

Actually...this is very good! LOL:

 

Three months is better than 7 years David, and where did I mention justifying anything I asked a question or was that too deep for you to comprehend.
I fully understand that your utter hatred for the man precludes you ever saying anything positive about him so dont bother replying.
As for been clueless at least I can tell the difference between 7+ years of total neglect of were the true threat lay and a wait of 3 months
Who attacked America or have you forgoten that small fact David in your blind hatred, well guess what it wasnt Saddam Nor Iraq were you have spent billions and lost countless lives for what!!
But of course you will try to find a way to blame that on President Obama the same way you have tried to blame him for everything else.
Hell if i recall corectly you were complaining the day after his inaugeration that he hadnt cured the bank failures.

 

One thing I agree with and that is this week's Time Magazine cover. It's His War Now.

 

Yup..it is. He inherited a fleet of s**t cars, all the transmissions gone, engines blowin oil. George beat the hell out of them for 8 years. Now none run. Bush says.."Good luck pal! on his way out. Obama has a screwdriver and a hammer to fix it all with. (cause Georgy took all the tools).
Fox spin? Well, it's all Obama's fault of course. They're HIS cars now. The right will want to know why all those cars ain't fixed yet. If he spends money to fix 'em, the right will critique him. If he junks them, the right will accuse him of wasting resources. If he fixes 'em, the right will slam him for his shoddy work. If he gives them away, the right will whine that giving cars away is a bad idea (like they do with minimum wage).
If he walks south, the right will say he shoulda been walking north. If he buys white toilet paper, the right will say he shoulda used cheap paper towels and reuse them.
If he wears a blue shirt, the right will say he's un-american. And of course if Obama bows to heads of state, the right will say he shoulda given them the finger.
Any Obama ideas? The answer is NO. If the republicans get back in someday, we'll have world wars 3,4,5, & 6.
Then...hand it back to the dems, and say..."They're your wars now". I love the republicans.....like a hemmoroid.

 

Tom,

There is one really major flaw with your line of thought. Obama knew that he would face all of these issues before he became President. If he didn't have a foreign policy plan formulated during his campaign and a strategy to deal with both the press and Republican criticism, then shame on him. He can't run for President under the guise that he has the vision and determination to make the country better and then simply blame the previous guy for every problem he can't fix. On second thought, he can do that, but history will be no kinder to him than the guy that created the problems.

You seem to be of the mindset that it doesn't matter what Obama does, because as long as a Republican is not in office, the country will be better off. That might be good enough for you, but it won't fly with the rest of the country. Obama has 2-3 more years to convince Americans that he is doing a good job or he will be a one term President. IMO, he has had a rocky start but I will not jump to conclusions and will reserve my judgement until the next election.

 

He made his bed with Afghanistan. Heck, he could have ended the mistake with one swoop of a pen. But nooooooo. Instead he absolutely made it his own war. Plain and simple really.

All the excuses and looking back and whining about what was done in the past is pretty irrelevant at this point. He has decided on what he thinks is the right action. He has decided to throw more bodies on the growing pile. He has decided to go whole hog into the folly that is Afghanistan and no whining about George Bush will change that fact. Regardless of what the hyperpartisians pontificate on either side, its his little blood bath now.

I will say Iraq is a little different since he seems content to follow the Bush plan to the end. But, not Afghanistan. Like it or not, he has made it his own. If Time and Joe Klein (both big Obama supporters) are saying it, it is not like it is Fox news.

But, I know. Like you said, you are giving him 4 years before he has to be responsible for anything. And, my guess is you will give him another 4 and another 4 before he is really, really responsible for anything. lol

 

I am not sure if that was directed at me or Tom. However, you can hold him responsible for whatever you want right now, but you cant do anything about it until 2012 so wouldn't it make just as much sense to evaluate his entire performance at that point rather than poisoning your opinion along the way.

 

We need the republicans back in there. They would never do such a thing. Honor and integrity are synonymous with republican leadership.

 

Tough to differ with you on Afghanistan. But then, I suppose he is the "decider" now. Iraq? He certainly seems to be back peddling on that too, but we'll see what happens there I suppose. One thing I'd add, and I will take the opportunity to blame former dictator Cheney and his chimp. I'm pretty sure the warlords have made Iraq as permanent a stay as possible before the party of wealth and prosperity were thrown out of office. Permanent bases bigger than some cities for one. Another is that there's so much hardware there, it'd be economically much more feasible to leave it all right where it is and continue killing brown people rather than pull it all out of there. Besides, we could build new stuff at great profits to spread around the rest of the planet and that'd be good "business". Point being if we wanted to leave today..we couldn't. I'm sure Obama is facing that now. But you're right...it's on him now to figure out a way to get it done and he knew that going in and I'm not seeing a lot of difference between Obama's policies and the previous crime family's. It makes me wonder what the perpetual "whining" from the "just say no" crowd is all about.

 

So long as there are only two realistic contenders, the republicans being one of them, the country is indeed better off. It isn't nearly good enough for me but those are the choices we are left with. If I ever need reminding or forget what it is I don't like about the party of, "buy" and FOR the corporations, I just tune in to Sean or Rush (or any other right winger for that matter) for about 90 seconds to restore my faith in voting to keep that party as far out of any elected office as my one vote will allow. Check that... 45 seconds.

 

While I agree that the "right winger"s are annoying, they don't really represent the Republican party. In the end, they are just entertainers making millions of dollars. They wouldn't make that money if they were not controversial. Perhaps you should pay more attention to the track record of the actual Republican politicians (other than Bush) rather than listening to some overpaid actors. I think you will find that whether Republican or Democrat, the track record of both is equally reprehensible.

I agree that our political choices have become the lesser of two evils. I just find the party that thinks they know how to spend my money better than I do to be more evil. Not surprising, but we agree to disagree.

 

I have made that point in the past. It would take months if not a year to get everything out that we wanted to get out and destroy or give away what we don't want.

Of course, Afghanistan looks to be going that way too with the doubling of the forces there under the current President. (30K now and the 20K he already sent soon after he took office).

On the other hand, I am one that thinks we may not ever leave either. We don;t often leave a place that we go to. Germany...still there. Japan...still there. Korea...yep. Kuwait...yep. We come but we don't leave. And I don;t care what party we are talking about in that regard. lol

 

Nope...right wingers are the same as the republican party. The right embraces them when it's convenient..they own them now. Overpaid actors perhaps...but representatives of the MAJORITY of the republican party. Republican politicians? Like maybe...
Ted Stevens (R) Alaska
Mitch McConnell (R) Kentucky
John Ensign (R) Nevada
Don Young (R) Arkansas
Nathan Deal (R) Georgia
Ken Calvert (R) California
Vern Buchanan (R) Florida
Tom Delay (R) Texas
Mark Foley (R) Florida
Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R) California
Bob Ney (R) Ohio

THESE actual republican politicians? Shall I post the remaining states that were not yet represented?

 

Oh man Lehigh...I missed this the first time around. I just noticed your references to "the party" and "your money?"
Supports my contention...when the wealthy think of their money..they think of the republicans as the party that will support them. Kinda telling that the folks who are already wealthy are the ones complaining about losing some of it.
Republicans...money.....greed...corporate America..wall street.. all walking hand in hand with republicans leading the way....wanting MORE...as we all fall right off the cliff.

 

Tell me, what is worse. The republicans who want to keep and make more money or the democrats who want to spend the Republicans money for them. They call it taxes, I call it theft.

 

The republicans lost their way after they took over congress back in 1994. They reached out to liberal democrats (HUGE mistake) and tried to make friends with these people. Credit the liberal democrats...they didn't reach back to the republicans, so republicans figured they if they spend some of our tax dollars on a number of democratic proposals, these liberals would play nice. You know...throw the socialists a bone.

Well...the democrats didn't play nice back and then republicans lost their fiscal conservative roots and started spending our tax dollars in faster fashion then even past democrats!?!? Bush II, like his father, did NOT stand up to democrats and caved to more and more government spending thereby alienating fiscal conservatives who had enough...and rightfully so!!

When the head officials of the RNC told all that the repubclican party needed a 'moderate' like McCain, well...there were many fiscal conservatives like myself that only voted for him (as we plugged our nose) because the thought of the community organizer running this country was (and is) too disturbing! (Ask yourself...how it that working out).

So that is where we are today...you have to vote for the lesser of two evils, NOT for a person, but more so against another evil.

The talk of a 3rd party is appealing, but face it...40% of this country will always be "gimmee-gimmee-gimmee" socialist democrats who have this insane ideal that the government should take care of EVERYTHING...they will NOT budge. They cry out class warfare and "burning black churches" just to appeal to people that want the goverment to provide a giant nipple to them so they can suck it dry.

No...no...a 3rd party will always assure that socialist liberals will always win. Look what happended in 1992! Clinton barely got 43% of the vote and won! Bush I and Perot split the vote from people that vote for less government and taxes...democrats must have had an organism that day.

So...unless we want to keep on electing the likes of people that have no idea on how a business is run so they can tax and redistibute it to their base, we have and should pick the lesser of the two evils which is republicans over the socialist, I mean democratic party.

 

BTW...I listened to B.O.'s speech in Oslo and I will give credit where credit is due. It was good. He actually sounded "tougher" than in the past where he was constantly apologizing to the world for being an American.

The irony is that he made a good speech why we must fight in wars as he accepted the "peace" prize.

Go ahead...mark it down...I gave him a compliment.