Im just saying what I have read on line concerning other world leaders, found it in very bad taste for him to go around the world saying crap about his own country ....say it from home amongst the homeys and it doesnt look as bad.

Did Bush apologize for Bill not getting Bin Ladin while he could?????????? Nope dont think so.

Honest Honu..I'm not sure where all these World leaders are who found it distasteful..unless Glenn Beck and Rush are World leaders. The US likes to think we are better than other countries and that's wrong. Bush ignored the World and World issues and Obama attempted to reconcile that and rightly so. The right would rather be isolationists and screw everyone else.

For gods sake..Did Bush think Bin Laden was rooming with Hussein? He kinda' decided to go in that direction rather than pursue Bin Ladin..even after 9/11. We can go tit for tat here..

I have to sleep..night Honu

cant argue that..

Nah man didnt someone on here post something a few days ago or a week ago I forget cause the days all runs together when you get a day off every 30 days or so . I swear I read something, maybe Rupert posted it and everyone who loves Barry went nutz , ah dunno but I swear there are statements somewhere that people in charge of countries thought he was a dusch for saying bad stuff about us abroad.
Dude Ill admit Im tired worked my second job today so I have been up since 4 am and I might be delusional.

Yes, I posted that article. The title was "World Sees Obama As Incompetent Amatuer".

I guess we'll see what happens in November. That article makes it sound like the Republicans are going to have huge gains in the House and Senate in the November elections. It said that it is possible that the Republicans could even gain control of both the House and Senate.

You say that the centrists may not support a Republican because they may feel he is too far to the right. I would argue that many of those centrists would not vote for Obama because they may now feel that he's too far to the left. We will see.

I assume you do realize that the Republicans will pick up seats in November. There is no doubt about that. The questions is how many seats.

Riot with her fingers in her ears and YELLING, "LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA!

i read that other country's actually lost some respect for obama when he did just that. many societies feel it's in poor taste for one to bash one's own 'tribe', especially when doing so in front of another tribe. i'll try to find a link to that.

http://politics.usnews.com/opinion/m...d-amateur.html


and yes, this is the same article rupert had linked a few days back.

that's still a win.....:



Forty-five percent prefer a GOP-controlled Congress after this year’s elections, compared with 43 percent who want a Democratic-controlled Congress.

This is the GOP’s second-straight lead on this generic-ballot question, which hasn’t occurred since 2002.

“The Republican Party has a major advantage in the fall, and this poll just reconfirms that,” says Democratic pollster Peter D. Hart, who conducted this poll with GOP pollster Bill McInturff.

Moreover, 32 percent say their vote this November will be a signal of opposition to President Obama, versus 27 percent who say it will be a signal of support for him. That’s a reversal from January, when 37 percent said their vote would be in support for the president, while 27 percent said it would be in opposition.


then there's this:

The problem is worse in swing areas. Last week's National Public Radio (NPR) poll of the 60 Democratic House seats most at risk this year showed just 37% of voters in these districts agreed Mr. Obama's "economic policies helped avert an even worse crisis and are laying a foundation for our eventual economic recovery"; 57% believed they "have run up a record federal deficit while failing to end the recession or slow the record pace of job losses."

and:

Mr. Obama's failures mean he can't lift his party by campaigning. A Public Policy Poll earlier this month reported that 48% said an Obama endorsement would make them less likely to vote for the candidate receiving it, while only one-third said they would be more likely to vote for a candidate endorsed by the president.

Republicans jumped into the lead last November in Gallup's party generic ballot match-ups among all voters, and since March the GOP has led or been tied every single week except one. In the Rasmussen Poll's tracking among likely voters, Republicans have been ahead by an average of seven points, 44% to 37%, since March. This reflects a significant political development—independents breaking for the GOP.

Then there is the intensity gap, which is particularly important in midterms. In Gallup, 45% of Republicans are "very enthusiastic" about voting this fall versus 24% of Democrats. This staggering 22-point gap is the largest so far this election year. And in the NPR survey of 60 swing Democratic districts, 62% of Republicans rated their likelihood of voting as 10, the highest. Only 37% of Democrats were similarly excited.

I know you guys will hate me for saying this, but Newt and the GOP congress made Clinton's presidency. He was heading down the wrong path (like Obama) until the Midterm elections and the GOP took congress.. Clinton went along with their idea's like they were his own. He figured out the best way to govern was from the center.

Clinton did a good job fiscally.. and he got to ride the .com wave.. but he completely screwed us by doing absolutely nothing about bin Laden, eventhough bin Laden carried out many attacks on the US (not really on our soil - but USS Cole and Kenya Embassy bombing, and many others).

If Clinton hadnt been such a freeking pu$$y, he could have created much disruption for bin Laden and his gang before 9/11 to happen.

The only time he did anything about it is when his impeachment hearing was going, and most believed he did some bombing just to take attention off that.

Its still a sad thing when Clinton was the best Pres of the past 20 years. (Ronnie blew him outta the water as far as Presidents go, though)

it was disgusting. for all the good we've done for the world, all the $ we spend out of our own damn pockets for other countries.. and this guy thinks he should apologize for us? Damn disgusting and insulting to the American citizens and the people who have died for this country.

But besides that "apology tour", I believe he made the right choice in hiring Clinton as SOS and I think she's done a very good job.

that might be the most inaccurate statement I've ever heard on the DT site, and that's saying something.

Did you forget to eat your wheaties yesterday Bob?

LMAO




Ah ... thanks ... REALLY needed a good belly laugh this morning.

Generalization, yes..innacurate no. When I have time I'll find the DT threads about US only and f' the rest of the World.

I think that's a bit dramatic Lori. Trying to make ammends with other countries has nothing to do with fallen war heroes. And I know a lot of American citizens who were very proud of what he did and felt a lot better about their country because of it.

considering it was you that replied.. it makes me feel much more confident in my opinion, Mr. "Goldielocks didnt want to try the beasts in the BCC" :rolleyes:

I dont know any who feel that way, except a handful of people on DT..

I felt extrememly insulted by that. There is no way an American president should apologize for this country.. the best country in the world. If he is sorry about it he has no right to be President.

And yes, it was an insult to the fallen patriots (IMO) especially the ones who have died fighting the war on terror.

yeah, Nascar and Del are the norm in the republican party :wf

I respectfully disagree and will leave it at that.:wf

If you ever make it to AP, you, me, Spencer and Dellinger can drink beers and discuss life.

I really do want to make it to Arlington sometime... Scav and I have been talking about it (where is that guy, btw?)

Right now though, my plans are trying to get to the Breeders Cup this year.. are u going there?

hope you guys make it! i've got tickets and reservations already.

We'll be there..No Scav though..he is going to Bears game in Canada instead.

football and Canada just doesnt sound right!!! (well I guess it does still sound better than football in London!! :zz:)

They should have major West Indies cricket matches in America!

16 bears games a year...only one bc!

LMAO!

You think Clinton will go down in history as a better President than Reagan? Have you been drinking today?

Who were you referring to in your original post, the Republican party or a few DT posters? It sounded like you were talking about the Republican party in general. I don't know the views of all the DT posters so I can't answer for them. But when it comes to the Republican party in general, it's not the case at all. I can only think of a couple of extremists like Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul that are pretty much isolationists.

Yes, the GOP "should" take alot of seats this fall - that's normal in any election following where the Pres and Congress/Senate are the same party.

Right now, though, the talk is that the GOP will not be able to take what they "should". I read something today where Arizona is blowing back in their faces of the GOP with the Hispanic vote in a big, and probably permanent, way - the GOP congressional candidates have suddenly lost ground (tons of percentage points) in the past month (Colorado, Arizona, Nevada) But there's lots of time to go yet.

Rand Paul wants to build an underground electric fence to protect Arizona. Angle is batshiat crazy - they are literally hiding her from the press exposure, fearful of what she'll say. Palin's Legal Defense Fund was just found illegal today, she has to give back the money to donors. The GOP just filibustered unemployment extensions and the Doc fix for medicare harming thousands of Americans. GOP Congressmen and letting British Petroleum hold campaign fundraisers for them.

We'll see ! A whole lot going on ...

The GOP should get Congress, not the Senate. We'll see.

You're talking about a total of 24 seats in the House and Senate, and the Democrats control 9 House seats with 2 Senate seats. Thats miniscule.

Another miniscule point I'll add though. The Republicans will definitely gain a seat in both the House and Senate from Indiana with Brad Ellsworth making a dumb move to challenge Dan Coates for Senate Evan Bayh's Senate seat. Ellsworth would just be fine if he stayed in the House.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...NewsCollection

Jobless Bill Dies Amid Deficit Fears

By GREG HITT And SARA MURRAY
WASHINGTON—Spooked by concern about deficits, the Senate shelved a spending bill that included an extension of unemployment benefits, suddenly cutting off a federal cash spigot opened by President Barack Obama when he took office 18 months ago.

The collapse of the wide-ranging legislation means that a total of 1.3 million unemployed Americans will have lost their assistance by the end of this week. It will also leave a number of states with large budget holes they had expected to fill with federal cash to help with Medicaid costs.

The impasse has been weeks in the making and reflects the deepening concern on Capitol Hill with the nation's fiscal situation, as well as a hardening of Republican opposition. Democrats had moved several times to pare the cost of the bill in an effort to win support from centrist Republicans and to make up defections from their own ranks.

On Thursday, Senate Democrats failed to secure the 60 votes needed to break off a GOP-led filibuster. Sen. Ben Nelson (D., Neb.) voted with Republicans in a 57-41 roll call. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) said this third vote on the matter would be the last, allowing the Senate to move on to modest legislation cutting taxes for small businesses.




Other economists argue that extended benefits have played a part in keeping people out of the labor force. "There's a very large body of research that says that more generous benefits and benefits that last longer…encourage people to stay out of work longer," said Bruce Meyer, an economist and public policy professor at the University of Chicago.

James Sherk, a labor economics analyst at the conservative Heritage Foundation think tank, said that while it could be argued that the benefits made available last year were too extensive, cutting off workers who expected to receive the full 99 weeks of benefits isn't ideal either. "You don't sort of pull the rug out from someone halfway through," he said.


and we wonder why we're going broke...99 weeks? wow.



and the last paragraph:

One element that will survive in a different form: a proposal to suspend a 21% cut in Medicare payments to doctors that's set to take effect this month. That was stripped from the bill last week in a cost-cutting step and sent to the House as a stand-alone measure. The House, voting 417 to 1, approved the six-month suspension of the cuts late Thursday

Let's hope the Senate approves it. Doubtful.

Don't tell Joey, he's excited about the coming Republican Tsunami :) **


** Potential Dee Tee horse name <vbg>

the senate already approved it, on the 18th....with the house having approved it, it only needs the prez to sign.

Ah, gotch ya.