Comparing Presidents

[Guest]

Tongue and cheek I know but there is a strange truth to it. Remember during the Reykjavik summit regarding them wanting us to stop SDI and Reagan walked around the table to Brezhnev and whispered to him in Russian “NO” and then walked out of the room? Where has our leadership gone?


https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=165&pictureid=1254

[Guest]

Tongue and cheek I know but there is a strange truth to it. Remember during the Reykjavik summit regarding them wanting us to stop SDI and Reagan walked around the table to Brezhnev and whispered to him in Russian “NO” and then walked out of the room? Where has our leadership gone?


https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=165&pictureid=1254

So I take it you think Obama isn't a manly man.....


How about JFK and the missile crises

[Guest]

Really really poor comparison dkl. So, one must be a macho woodsman to make a good president? No thanks, President Obama is the one with the brains AND the brawn. Need we say more?

[Guest]

Obama is weak, an apologist and extremely naive especially on foreign policy. Although OB does assert himself quite well when it comes to spending other peoples money and raising taxes.

Regarding JFK, I think he was ten times the man OB is and he certainly wasn’t weak. Heck, by today’s standards he was downright conservative.

I'd trade OB for JFK in a heatbeat.

[Guest]

I agree, the Brezhnev incident was a feel-good moment at the time, but unfortunately, it's not the 80's any more.

[Guest]

Strength, resolve and principals are timeless. They worked back then and they still work today. All we need is a President that has them.

[Guest]

Really really poor comparison dkl. So, one must be a macho woodsman to make a good president? No thanks, President Obama is the one with the brains AND the brawn. Need we say more?

Curious...could you please expand on that statement? What brain and brawn are you referring to? Examples would be helpful for us to understand. Do you call it "brains" to spend taxpayer's money($$$trillions) to lead us out of a recession? Do you call it "brawn" to have no response to what is happening in Iran? ( his indecisiveness was nerve-wracking)

Yes....we need to say mucho-more!!!!!

[Guest]

I agree, the Brezhnev incident was a feel-good moment at the time, but unfortunately, it's not the 80's any more.

Your right...it isn't the 80's anymore. And in what century do you think those people in Iran, Pakistan etc. are operating in? 1280's?

[Guest]

Obama is...extremely naive especially on foreign policy....Lordy, I hate to return to using George W. Bush as an example. But you're the one who chose to contrast him with President Obama.

If you'll recall during Bush 43's initial campaign, his almost complete absence of knowledge of foreign policy was repeatedly exposed. His problem was so great that his father, Bush 41, lined up a series of foreign policy experts to conduct private tutoring sessions for him. The history written of the time describes the fact that Dubya seldom sought the counsel of any of the experts his Dad lined up for him with the exception of one--Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the ambassador from Saudi Arabia--with whom he was particularly friendly. So George W.'s foreign policy, particularly as regards the Middle East, tended to reflect the feelings and desires of the Saudi royal family. In addition, Bush 43 was known to reject the inclusion of any people experienced in foreign policy in his administration. He particularly rejected the idea of seeking the counsel of any from academia, who might have spent their lives studying foreign policy, history and foreign cultures.

Understanding Bush's experience, rejection of the idea of understanding various points of view, and a "snap judgement" decision-making style pretty fully explains why our foreign relations sank to such a low point during the terms of the last administration.

No, I think you're 180-degrees off, DK. President Obama didn't begin with any more experience than George w. Bush. But he has consistently sought out the advice and recommendations of a wide range of people experienced and expert in foreign policy. He is known for thoughtfully considering such input before making foreign policy decisions, or any other kind of decision. People may not always agree with the foreign policies he chooses, but for sure they are well-researched and thought out. I believe we're going to see a vast improvement in our relationships with other sovereign nations during the Obama administration. More importantly, I think we'll begin to see that we will begin to achieve many of our national objectives as the result of improved foreign realtions--which after all is the objective of foreign policy in the first place.

[Guest]

As John McCain said, that's who they are, it's not who we are.

[Guest]

As John McCain said, that's who they are, it's not who we are.

You have to deal with people with what they understand. Nations are not one size fits all.

[Guest]

We liberated Iraq and now they are having free elections. We have / are liberating Afghanistan and now they are having free elections. The people of Iran are taking a close look at what’s going on around them and now they want the same. Obama had nothing to do with that at all. Obama’s apology tour servers nothing more than to make us look weak and North Korea is now taking full advantage of it. Maybe if we would have just apologized to Japan and Germany we could have avoided WWII?

Obama is no champion of freedom. He is only a champion of socialism, uncontrolled spending, private and public sector takeovers and massive government regulation and taxes in our daily lives. It serves his own personal power hungry agenda and nothing more. Obama doesn’t free people he seeks to enslave them to government and his twisted view of how America should look.

The tide is already turning against him and for good reason.

[Guest]

I thought he was comparing him to Reagan. Doesn't matter, compare him to any past president other then Jimmy and he is a weak, naive, and not ready for the job of president. And just what experience does BO have in foreign policy? He didn't even bother to get advice. All he knows how to do is spend your children, grandchildren and great grandchildren money. So continue to justify his existence by bashing Bush some more. As bad as he was, and I for one think he destroyed the republican party for which I will never forgive him, but he was so far ahead of BO there is no contest. BO will go down in history, if we survive him to have a history, as one of the worst presidents every elected. Be proud you supported him.

[Guest]

]Lordy, I hate to return to using George W. Bush as an example. But you're the one who chose to contrast him with President Obama.
[/B]
If you'll recall during Bush 43's initial campaign, his almost complete absence of knowledge of foreign policy was repeatedly exposed. His problem was so great that his father, Bush 41, lined up a series of foreign policy experts to conduct private tutoring sessions for him. The history written of the time describes the fact that Dubya seldom sought the counsel of any of the experts his Dad lined up for him with the exception of one--Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the ambassador from Saudi Arabia--with whom he was particularly friendly. So George W.'s foreign policy, particularly as regards the Middle East, tended to reflect the feelings and desires of the Saudi royal family. In addition, Bush 43 was known to reject the inclusion of any people experienced in foreign policy in his administration. He particularly rejected the idea of seeking the counsel of any from academia, who might have spent their lives studying foreign policy, history and foreign cultures.

Understanding Bush's experience, rejection of the idea of understanding various points of view, and a "snap judgement" decision-making style pretty fully explains why our foreign relations sank to such a low point during the terms of the last administration.

No, I think you're 180-degrees off, DK. President Obama didn't begin with any more experience than George w. Bush. But he has consistently sought out the advice and recommendations of a wide range of people experienced and expert in foreign policy. He is known for thoughtfully considering such input before making foreign policy decisions, or any other kind of decision. People may not always agree with the foreign policies he chooses, but for sure they are well-researched and thought out. I believe we're going to see a vast improvement in our relationships with other sovereign nations during the Obama administration. More importantly, I think we'll begin to see that we will begin to achieve many of our national objectives as the result of improved foreign realtions--which after all is the objective of foreign policy in the first place.

Seems to me that he was comparing Obama with President Reagan...not Bush.:shrug:

[Guest]

As John McCain said, that's who they are, it's not who we are.
ANd "who we are" surely shouldn't be ones who bow and scrape to every $.10 despot who says he's offended because as his folk were beheading setting westerners ablaze, and then cheering around the headless and/or smoldering remains, we embarrassed a few chauvinists in front of women and made a few others wet their pants even when they were never in harm's way.

Foreign relations is all about parity and respect, not pandering and concessions. When you offer an inch to a despot, he takes the whole yardstick. Being respectful is one thing, but cowering down doesn't cut it at all - in public or in private.

[Guest]

We liberated Iraq and now they are having free elections. We have / are liberating Afghanistan and now they are having free elections. The people of Iran are taking a close look at what’s going on around them and now they want the same. Obama had nothing to do with that at all. Obama’s apology tour servers nothing more than to make us look weak and North Korea is now taking full advantage of it. Maybe if we would have just apologized to Japan and Germany we could have avoided WWII?

Obama is no champion of freedom. He is only a champion of socialism, uncontrolled spending, private and public sector takeovers and massive government regulation and taxes in our daily lives. It serves his own personal power hungry agenda and nothing more. Obama doesn’t free people he seeks to enslave them to government and his twisted view of how America should look.

The tide is already turning against him and for good reason.
:coolsmiley: Good post... I'm beginning to think that the left don't really care if people are free. Doesn't anybody remember the purple thumbs shown with pride when the Iraq people voted? Don't you think that planted a few seeds of thought in other suppressed Nations?

What do the lefties believe in???? They surely didn't believe in people's lives when we pulled out of Vietnam..

[Guest]

I think the liberals are going down with a massive defeat in 2010 and again in 2012. Some where I work who voted for OB have told me he has gone way too far for their taste and will vote to overturn the majority just to keep him in check until 2012. Even his own moderate democrats are running scared with his out of control takeovers, spending and policies.

I do believe this Presidency will go done in history as a total disaster.

[Guest]

At the end of the day, I'm still more comfortable with the president who is in the White House vs. the alternative choice in the last election. My opinion may change, but hasn't yet.

[Guest]

At the end of the day, I'm still more comfortable with the president who is in the White House vs. the alternative choice in the last election. My opinion may change, but hasn't yet.
For balance, national security and domestic stability, I would have been more comfortable the Republican choice for President and a Democratic Congress, than the Democratic Party controlling the Executive and Congress.

[Guest]

the current populist administration has added and practices a 4th:

let's kinda hang back and wait and see.

Forget the party....my interest is in the man who is the decision maker....Republican, Democrat, black, white, yellow, etc, etc.......

Evaluate the LEADERSHIP demonstrated. On the Iran incident he gets an 'F'.
The US policy on man's inhumanity to man is crystal clear. He wanted to see how it was going to go...come out...wind up.....what the :cus: does that have to do with our view of what is being done.

Populists...barf

btk

[Guest]

Yep..He didn't want to commit himself until he seen how it was going to play out. Real decisive, huh? That explains why he voted "present" while in congress rather then "yes" or "no". barf

[Guest]

...Foreign relations is all about parity and respect, not pandering and concessions...

I don't know, Steve. I'd tend to say that foreign relations is all about achieving the objectives that are set for this country.

I might go farther and say that our objectives shouldn't include any "feel good" stuff or policies designed to make us feel better without achieving much for the American public other than that. The "foreign policies" I'm talking about are those wherein the relationships we strike with other countries will benefit this country and our residents, moreso than any benefit that our policies might have that would improve or promote the lot of the residents of other sovereign nations, and certainly not any foreign policy actions which do nothing more than make any of our political leaders "look good"..

As mentioned in the Foreign Policy Agenda of the U.S. Department of State, our foreign policy is designed "to create a more secure, democratic, and prosperous world for the benefit of the American people..." Some of the jurisdictional goals of our foreign policy include: "export controls, including nonproliferation of nuclear technology and nuclear hardware; measures to foster commercial intercourse with foreign nations and to safeguard American business abroad; international commodity agreements; international education; and protection of American citizens abroad."

What I'm saying is that the conduct of our foreign policy will be successful if the objectives noted above are accomplished. If they are, it makes little difference of how our leaders appear on the world stage. What's far more important is what they accomplish. Specifically, if nothing of consequence to benefit the U.S. by our President blowing off the likes of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or Hugo Chavez, I would take little satisfaction from that.

The name of the game is what our leadership can accomplish for our benefit in conducting our relationships with foreign countries and their leaders, nothing more or nothing less.

[Guest]

ANd "who we are" surely shouldn't be ones who bow and scrape to every $.10 despot who says he's offended because as his folk were beheading setting westerners ablaze, and then cheering around the headless and/or smoldering remains, we embarrassed a few chauvinists in front of women and made a few others wet their pants even when they were never in harm's way.

Foreign relations is all about parity and respect, not pandering and concessions. When you offer an inch to a despot, he takes the whole yardstick. Being respectful is one thing, but cowering down doesn't cut it at all - in public or in private.

You are absolutely right. Parity and respect and not bowing down to some king and then dissing our friends England and France like this clown did. What kind of protocol when we give them cheap trinkets( I pod with "him" on it and a set of DVD's)
The world is laughing at this administration. They consider it weak and undecided.

[Guest]

...The world is laughing at this administration. They consider it weak and undecided...Hmmm, I must have missed those articles.

I know the worldwide media leans way far to the left, so it's unlikely they'd be writing critical stories about Obama. So I'm wondering who reported on this widespread disdain for our new President? Please don't tell me that the reports came from any of the "entertainers".

[Guest]

WHAT leadership Bille?? This guy is a community organizer. He is playing true to form. It's what he knows. Read Rules for Radicals. It's his playbook.

Problem is, WE are his targets. Once he gets control of everything in our lives, which right now will be by yearend, he will have us all by the 'short ones.'

Even out elections will be tainted even more by ACORN. Lord have mercy folks -- wake up.

[Guest]

There are hundreds of articles on both sides of the pond about Obama dissing England and France.
Here is one to start...plenty more if requested:

http://donsingleton.blogspot.com/2009/02/obama-disses-british.html

[Guest]

There are hundreds of articles on both sides of the pond about Obama dissing England and France.
Here is one to start...plenty more if requested:

http://donsingleton.blogspot.com/2009/02/obama-disses-british.htmlAww, c'mon Keedy. This is only a blog entry by some guy named Don Singleton. Heck, either one of us could have posted an entry from this forum as evidence of widespread opinion one way or the other.

By the way. while I liked Winnie, I think a change of decorating of the Oval Office, particularly by a son of Illinois, to include Abe Lincoln is OK with me.

Who is Don Singleton anyway?

[Guest]

There are tons of news stories about the protocol blunders of Obama. The British are fond of saying how they haven't drank the Obama Kool-aid. They are fond of saying things that the American press won't.
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/03/05/british-press-turn-noses-up-at-president-obamas-flick-gift-pack/

[Guest]

Really really poor comparison dkl. So, one must be a macho woodsman to make a good president? No thanks, President Obama is the one with the brains AND the brawn. Need we say more?

OHB's Brains have not been varified yet.

Yoda

A member of the loyal opposition

[Guest]

OHB's Brains have not been varified yet.

Yoda

A member of the loyal opposition

LOL...Here's a funny newscast with a twist of truth:

http://www.youtube.com/v/mT8WhH7VdIM&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&feature=player_embedded&fs=1

[Guest]

I don't know, Steve. I'd tend to say that foreign relations is all about achieving the objectives that are set for this country.

I might go farther and say that our objectives shouldn't include any "feel good" stuff or policies designed to make us feel better without achieving much for the American public other than that. The "foreign policies" I'm talking about are those wherein the relationships we strike with other countries will benefit this country and our residents, moreso than any benefit that our policies might have that would improve or promote the lot of the residents of other sovereign nations, and certainly not any foreign policy actions which do nothing more than make any of our political leaders "look good"..

As mentioned in the Foreign Policy Agenda of the U.S. Department of State, our foreign policy is designed "to create a more secure, democratic, and prosperous world for the benefit of the American people..." Some of the jurisdictional goals of our foreign policy include: "export controls, including nonproliferation of nuclear technology and nuclear hardware; measures to foster commercial intercourse with foreign nations and to safeguard American business abroad; international commodity agreements; international education; and protection of American citizens abroad."

What I'm saying is that the conduct of our foreign policy will be successful if the objectives noted above are accomplished. If they are, it makes little difference of how our leaders appear on the world stage. What's far more important is what they accomplish. Specifically, if nothing of consequence to benefit the U.S. by our President blowing off the likes of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or Hugo Chavez, I would take little satisfaction from that.

The name of the game is what our leadership can accomplish for our benefit in conducting our relationships with foreign countries and their leaders, nothing more or nothing less.

You use a word with special meaning - leadership!

Being a leader requires acting like one, because your actions have special meaning to those behind you (whom you are supposed to be leading) and those in front of you (whose actions towards the US will be based on the leader's backbone, or lack thereof). When the "leader" loses the faith of those behind him/her, those in front (a.k.a. Foreign Policy targets) of him/her tend to be more demonstrative, and foreign policy becomes defensive.

President Obama was elected not because he was the desired choice of the majority, but that his opponent lost the support of many of his party's sub-groups. He was unknown on the international scene and totally inexperienced in dealing with other heads-of-state. President Obama still has to "earn his stars" as a national leader, especially if he wants to remain in government housing beyond 2012. Bowing to those who are his international peers (and I'm being generous with that label) and his rhetoric to date have made "waffle" the expectation.

Here's hoping the in-flight entertainment on Air Force One starts showing "Midway," "We Were Soldiers," and "Apollo 13."

[Guest]

You use a word with special meaning - leadership!

Being a leader requires acting like one, because your actions have special meaning to those behind you (whom you are supposed to be leading) and those in front of you (whose actions towards the US will be based on the leader's backbone, or lack thereof). When the "leader" loses the faith of those behind him/her, those in front (a.k.a. Foreign Policy targets) of him/her tend to be more demonstrative, and foreign policy becomes defensive.

President Obama was elected not because he was the desired choice of the majority, but that his opponent lost the support of many of his party's sub-groups. He was unknown on the international scene and totally inexperienced in dealing with other heads-of-state. President Obama still has to "earn his stars" as a national leader, especially if he wants to remain in government housing beyond 2012. Bowing to those who are his international peers (and I'm being generous with that label) and his rhetoric to date have made "waffle" the expectation.

Here's hoping the in-flight entertainment on Air Force One starts showing "Midway," "We Were Soldiers," and "Apollo 13."

Or my favorite Braveheart. :crap2: FREEDOM