:tro: another entry for the post of the year

You have to take the job away from both a monumental war criminal and a pompous rich kid in order to come under consideration.

How do you know I havent? I work with people who come from countries that have waged war on people and they are my friends and some of them are rich.
I can hope and aspire as much as the next person.......
I deserve a prize.:)


A side note ..... the person to whom you are refering to couldnt re-apply for the job so I think it was an easy beat.

I took that class. Was so loud.

I think they gave it to him as a consolation prize for not getting the Olympics.

LOL

he can't let the fact he won this farce of an award hamstring his actions. he still needs to do what's best for america, which so far i don't believe he's done. any decision on afganistan is still weeks away, which imo indicates weakness on his part, and a willingness to listen to too many people. you'd think he'd have had some ideas in mind already in that regard. if he still intends to do what needs to be done there, then he needs to put in place any and everything necessary to get things headed back in the right direction, so that it can end that much more quickly. it's dragged on too long. yeah, he inherited one hell of a mess, but it's a job he sought knowing what was ahead.

You must be kid'n. If Betty Crocker gets raped by someone white as an egg, then they are gunna find a way to link it back to Obama. It's obvious they won't work with him on anything, and then, they are still gunna say he accomplished nothing (as they openly pray for the country to pleeeeease tank.) I just think it's kind of sick that people elected a guy to be bipartisan, and then are giving a free ride to those that are fighting that bipartisan effort. Look at all the "Hi, I'm God" type Independents that voted for someone to lead a bipartisan effort. Are those Independents complaining about the fact he is the only one trying to be bipartisan?... No, of course not. After voting(especially in Indiana..thank you so much,) they've fallen asleep again.

I don't know what you been smoking, but Obama,Pelosi,Reid,Hoyer have in no way been bipartisan. There could be a fringe element of those who want the country to tank because of Obama, but they don't represent any type of respectable conservative. And that fringe is dwarfed by the "Bush Derangement Syndrome" that runs amok in media,schools and colleges!

No, Pelosi, Reid, and Hoyer aren't bipartisan. Obama can control them if he can get a reason, too, but so far nobody from an "in play" state (DEM or REP) wants to look like they're letting him accomplish something. Bush was disliked by Conservatives for what he didn't do. He was disliked by most others for what he did get done.

He's gunna have to threaten to campaign against these back-stabbing DEMS in the Democratic Primaries. He can get this scum beat. They better wake up, cuz he can punish them if he wakes up. Call them in. Inform them. That's it. Tell them: "If You defy me, you aren't even getting to face Republicans in the general election. Come correct, or become roadkill." See, Scuds has the answer, and the brotha is still examining the cube for a tame solution that isn't there. No Pressure...No Pleasure.

i have never listened to glenn beck, but i can imagine, based on what i've read about him, what he would have had to say. i don't listen to any of the talking heads; they're all too tilted to the right for me. i don't watch o'reilly, or fox news for that matter...

At this point in the debate,Bush is irellevent. Obama has given the knuckleheads free reign to construct legislation or to quash it. The has been no meaningful dialogue. Senate Republicans have a proposal...it's called 3400.
Bill 3200, which has been the 1000 lb monkey in the room, has morphed in to the Baucas bill, I think.

Needs to discipline his own people. He went wrong by tolerating their bullsht (at all.) Why be so nice with this here disgraceful lice.

He's not a hands-on kinda guy! Relative newcomer to BIG political stage(this ain't Chicago) Inept at dealing with the intricacies of global diplomacy, and has absolutely no clue on how to manage a war, or take of our troops....no doubt about it, he's on a roll!;)

Just read an article that said Obama is thinking of paying the Afghans not to fight for the Taliban.....he's LOST!

:tro: :{>:

good piece!

yeah, i thought it was....just saw this this morning:

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/1...&mod=sphere_wd


some excerpts:


Robert Reich, Clinton Labor Dept. Secretary: It underscores the paradox of Obama. On his blog, Reich writes that the president “has demonstrated mastery in both delivering powerful rhetoric and providing the nation and the world with fresh and important ways of understanding current challenges. But he has not yet delivered. To the contrary, he often seems to hold back from the fight—temporizing, delaying, or compromising so much that the rhetoric and insight he offers seem strangely disconnected from what he actually does.


Whereas Bush did not use force against North Korea, Obama does not rely on dialogue in Afghanistan. But the statement does pressure Obama not to use force in the theater that counts the most, namely the Iranian nuclear build-up. So, from the Leftist Norwegian point of view, it’s a twofer — bash Bush and handcuff Obama.”

John Dickerson, Slate magazine: Pundits win! “The Nobel committee has validated the idea that speeches and atmospherics are really important.”

29.95 full length........was it gabby johnson or gabby hayes??? sure you always have johnson on your mind but may have made a mistake here.

Obama's long-stated ideas about nuclear arms buildup were a good part of what got him elected, I suspect - the contrast to Bush - and I doubt those ideas will change - based upon the Nobel? LOL - unless the world situation changes markedly.

Obviously Obama hasn't done anything to earn the Peace Nobel yet, except be just what the Nobel committee said: the representative of a United States people that clearly cast out eight years of aggressive military and national solitarianism and isolationism, the starter of two wars, the nose thumbing at Koyoto and the United Nations, in favor of returning to the world stage as a participant. It's a vote of confidence from Europe. They've suffered through the last eight years of American foreign policy, too.

How much do you want to wager that I made a mistake? Being that you're a democrat I'll limit it to $20.

i can't bet anything now, that mirror broke me. wait til my check comes on the 3rd.

Cry me a river.....Both Kyoto and UN are broken mechanisms. We don't need a vote of confidence from Europe....We're the one's always bailing their asses out!

Oh boy Obama makes the Europeans happy!!! That alone is enough to vote against him in 2012.

Funny for a guy that loves the world he seems to be taking an awful strange tact in regards to trade by levying heavy tariffs on the rest of the worlds imports to the US. I suppose a speech is more important than that of course. Style over substance. Very European.

Of course there is also that little matter where the Obamites want Honduras to do what WE say despite the overwhelming evidence that the deposed pres was in fact in violation of thier constitution and the "coup" was totally legal. I guess because Honduras doesnt have Nuclear weapons Obama feels he can boss them around.

The UN is really a total farce and should be ignored most of the time.

Returning to the world as a participant? That is a gem. Where exactly have we been? On one hand we meddle in others business too much but on the other we dont participate?

A vote of confidence from Europe? Didnt we have a war a long time ago so that we didnt need to please our European keepers?

And the hope diamond of them all. "Obama's 'long stated' nuclear policy was a good part of what got him elected".
I dont recall 'Nuclear policy' as being a critical factor in last year election. As a matter of fact I dont recall ever hearing any President talk of anything but a reduction in nuclear arms. Naturally it is all a farce because only responsible countries will actually follow through on any reductions. Dont forget that we have been footing the bill to disarm Russia's aging nukes either. And Obama talks the talk and takes the laurels but the truth is that he added only $4 million to the budget towards nuclear disarmament. Plus there is already a 15 year backlog to disarm nukes already in line to be shut down. Not to mention that there is no place to store the disposed nuclear waste since Yucca Mountain was officially killed by Obama.

By the way Russia has 13000 nuclear weapons and the US has around 9400. There are 4200 US nuclear arms waiting to be disarmed from earlier treaties.

Sounds like a peaceful process anyway.

i was torn between pointing out the irony of angela merkel love/euro hate and this quote but it was a slam dunk and the other just an easy layup.

"legal" coup's?

sweeeeeet!

i can't wait for our own.

Yeah, there's only dead Americans in Iraq.

LOL - just quoting what the Nobel Committee said.

Glad to see you're not rabidly worked up over this ;)

Ah, a liberal intellectual who doesnt have the necessary components to understand logic, reason or quotations. Pretty common around here.

I'm not sure what is worse, quoting the Nobel dopes or their boy Carter.

I'm just happy you are posting

Please choose.
We are isolationist country that started two wars

or

The EU and the UN are our partners in the wars



You cant be both

nothing personal chuck but if i posted about "legal" robberies, i'd hope you had the sense to call me on it.

our supreme court doesn't have an army. like most.

it's just funny that the far right thinks the proper way to enforce a judicial decision is with a gun in this case.

just sayin'.

The quotes were around the "coup". What they did in removing that guy was totally legit. The Supreme Court of a sovereign country declared that the president is acting far beyond his powers and is trying to change the laws so that he can take control Chavez -style and his removal was legal according to their laws. That was the legal part.

They have an election coming up. The deposed President can no longer stay in power. He tries to hijack the country and change the rule of law keeping him in power, which is worse than simply rigging the election like the Iranians did. The supreme court removes him from office (actually he ran) to ensure that the elections can legally take place and the people can elect their new leader.

But somehow in the wisdom of our current state dept, they want to strong arm the Honduran people into putting the deposed president BACK IN PLACE! You just cant make this stuff up. I thought we were in favor of democracy?

Huh? I'm not the one trying to straddle that fence. Thanks for reiterating my point :tro:

I think the next thing the far right ultra-con crazies have to screech about is what Obama is going to do with the $1.4 million he recieved from the Nobel committee, that he is going to give to charity. No way he'll win with this.

If he gives it to international charities, he will be crucified for putting aid to foreign needs above starving Americans (you know, like folks still homeless from Katrina ...)

If any international charity recipient does work in Africa or a Muslim country, I think Rush Limbaugh may physically, actually explode, and the birthers will say, "I told you so".

If Obama divvies it up to American domestic charities, he can be pilliored for violating and insulting the world-wide, international scope of the Nobel award.

And any American charity recipients, of course, will be tied, by six degrees Kevin Bacon, to Acorn.

the honduran supreme court didn't remove zelaya from office. that took a few men with guns kicking in his door and flying him out of the country.

if obama is found to be acting beyond his authority by our supreme court, is the proper remedy a military coup?

it's a rhetorical question.

i hope.

btw: the "honduran people" that removed him from office is actually the same 25 families that have run the country the last 100 years. and the same 25 families that put him in power.

they made a mistake and took out the knife to cure the problem.

As opposed to our conservative intellectuals, or our conservative non-intellectuals? :rolleyes:

Im all for isolationism. Let the rest of the mongrels sort their own crap out ....they dont want our interference anyway. They would like to continue to slaughter their own people and wage war among themselves and as long as they dont attack us again we should just let them carry on.