wrong (real, perceived or lied about)....because it would not work to just single out whoever is in ones cross hairs today....if however prosecution must be entertained then how about prosecuting all the liars and wrong doers in Washington? Not a bad idea but there would be NOBODY not up for prosecution for something, hence none get prosecuted....the situation is partisan insensitive as they are all involved or none are not excluded.

Some example they set for morals and doing what is right...they are perfect examples of what not to do. As mere mortals we the people could not get away with it.....

It comes with being a politician.

BTK

Originally Posted by billethkid

wrong (real, perceived or lied about)....because it would not work to just single out whoever is in ones cross hairs today....if however prosecution must be entertained then how about prosecuting all the liars and wrong doers in Washington? Not a bad idea but there would be NOBODY not up for prosecution for something, hence none get prosecuted....the situation is partisan insensitive as they are all involved or none are not excluded.

Some example they set for morals and doing what is right...they are perfect examples of what not to do. As mere mortals we the people could not get away with it.....

It comes with being a politician.

BTK

OMG Just last week they were talking about Truman being a criminal for bombing Japan. Where would it end? There is a way for prosecuting someone by using his past. For instance: The drunk driving incident which killed a young woman when Ted Kennedy drove his car off a bridge. Most experts believe that one incident kept him from winning the Presidency. To be fair, I'm sure there are plenty of examples of politicians from the other party being tried in the media, also.

Good or bad...I think it would be logistically impossible to prosecute wrong doings from the past in our courts.

Originally Posted by billethkid

wrong (real, perceived or lied about)....because it would not work to just single out whoever is in ones cross hairs today....if however prosecution must be entertained then how about prosecuting all the liars and wrong doers in Washington? Not a bad idea but there would be NOBODY not up for prosecution for something, hence none get prosecuted....the situation is partisan insensitive as they are all involved or none are not excluded.

Some example they set for morals and doing what is right...they are perfect examples of what not to do. As mere mortals we the people could not get away with it.....

It comes with being a politician.

BTK

You are correct of course BTK, but Chelsea and others (she is not alone) react to crticism of President Obama (or actually anything within their party) with the Bush rhetoric and I would really love to see it without the all the sound bites, etc....this is the answer to most criticism of Obama....blame it on or blame Bush !

You notice, except for VK (this is my opinion)...NOBODY defends Obama with any facts or discussion....they simply refer to Bush !

I actually can see the frustration and the calling everything in political to be negative if you dont have any facts to discuss or do not have the interest to develop facts, and you just want to follow blindly. It would be frustrating to read anti congress and anti Obama each and every day.

Just to be a bit self serving.....most of what I have posted on here is anti Obama and has been since the primary before he was the candidate. Back in the days when those who are upset with the criticism were calling him an "empty suit" but now swoon at his feet.

I am not a Bush apologist, but cannot prove that to anyone on here just simply based on timing of my coming to this board.

Bucco, sweetie. You're the one that brought up the past. The past starts less than a second ago and goes a long way back baby! You just seem to want to go back as far as the campaign.

Anyway, I just know you missed me and had to give you a shout out!

Originally Posted by chelsea24

Bucco, sweetie. You're the one that brought up the past. The past starts less than a second ago and goes a long way back baby! You just seem to want to go back as far as the campaign.

Anyway, I just know you missed me and had to give you a shout out!

As always I have no clue what the meaning of your post is ~!!

I brought up the past relative to the training and background of President Obama, a subject I posted on here many many times about as far back as when you called him that "empty suit".

Now that you have swooned for him, I have stayed the course because I think his background if absolutely relative (and he is doing what I told you would happen during the campaign).

You want to discuss Bush...fine with me, but discuss it..dont give out the sound bites you hear from the party. TALK about it....I am agreeing with your idea of an open investigation with all the facts on the table.

Bucco, do you really think her reply deserves a response? Consider the source. Some people would never believe what they know to be true if it was placed in front of them on a silver platter. Sometimes your better off to ignore people who have nothing valid to say.

he was the only reporter to ask any really journalistic questions at the last news conference...i think there may be at least one fair reporter in the mainstream media....how refreshing!

Originally Posted by Keedy

OMG Just last week they were talking about Truman being a criminal for bombing Japan. Where would it end? There is a way for prosecuting someone by using his past. For instance: The drunk driving incident which killed a young woman when Ted Kennedy drove his car off a bridge. Most experts believe that one incident kept him from winning the Presidency. To be fair, I'm sure there are plenty of examples of politicians from the other party being tried in the media, also.

Good or bad...I think it would be logistically impossible to prosecute wrong doings from the past in our courts.

Logically, it will end with the incitement of George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, ET AL for treason. Didn't you figure?

Yoda

A member of the loyal opposition

The purpose of this thread was not in anyway to say anything negative about Islam, nor anyone's religion but simply the hypocrisy shown on the issue of Islam where as in the primary and campaign it was something NOT to be mentioned at all, it is now a topic of discussion.

I add this note because during the primary and the campaign there was a poster or two (I am sorry I do not recall their names, but it was not me) who would refer to our President using his middle name. There were also a few radio commentators who mentioned it on the air.

The posters were really ridiculed on here...they were taken to task BIG TIME. The radio hosts were ridiculed on cable shows and criticized loud and clear.

Today, I heard the President use his middle name...so now I suppose it is ok !

This note is not meant to say anything negative about Islam nor any person's religion, but simply to address the hypocrisy !

Originally Posted by Bucco

...Today, I heard the President use his middle name...so now I suppose it is ok !

Yeah, I think it's OK for a person to use all of his given names...or not use them, as he/she sees fit.

We are really testing a new level of political criticism with discussion of people's given names, I think. I had nothing to say about the names my parents gave me, nor does anyone else that I ever heard of, including Barack Hussein Obama.

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

Yeah, I think it's OK for a person to use all of his given names...or not use them, as he/she sees fit.

We are really testing a new level of political criticism with discussion of people's given names, I think. I had nothing to say about the names my parents gave me, nor does anyone else that I ever heard of, including Barack Hussein Obama.

Maybe if Obama just used his middle name in the begining of his campaign instead of insisting that nobody use it then everybody would have gotten over it and he could just carry on with the campaign. Therefore, he made it the issue be insisting nobody use it. Typical victim crap.

Keedy

How many people here use their middle given name in day-to-day affairs? Not many, I'd guess. The only time I use mine is when I have to give my middle initial to charge on a credit card.

So why is it such a big deal that President Obama didn't run his campaign, or is running his administration, with infrequent use of his middle given name? Might it be because it's a foreign-sounding name and his antagonists desire to make its use an emotional issue?

The answer is obvious, I think. If President Obama's middle name is one of the biggest issues regarding his presidency, the U.S. will be in great shape!

perception aspect that is very well managed by him and/or his team and or the media. Anything that could possibly be an unfavorable perspective is very effectively omitted/glossed over/renamed/etc.
No different than any other politician ( or any of us ...eh?).

Most Presidents are referred to more often than not with the middle name or intial. It has been jus the way it has been done...not that it was so much for pride or any other reason. But in this era of our history, like it or not the overt abstinance of using his middle name was good planning during the campaign. And as I said in another post he is using it now only because it brings some value for him in the current settings.

Not a big deal ( I don't think). No different than somebody with a middle name of Hitler....I wonder how often they would use it...I wouldn't!!



BTK

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

How many people here use their middle given name in day-to-day affairs? Not many, I'd guess. The only time I use mine is when I have to give my middle initial to charge on a credit card.

So why is it such a big deal that President Obama didn't run his campaign, or is running his administration, with infrequent use of his middle given name? Might it be because it's a foreign-sounding name and his antagonists desire to make its use an emotional issue?

The answer is obvious, I think. If President Obama's middle name is one of the biggest issues regarding his presidency, the U.S. will be in great shape!

That is precisely my point....him and only him made it an issue. By insisting that nobody use it..automatically made it an issue.
Many times in history the cover-up of a crime or incident takes on a life of it's own. The mystery or cover-up becomes the issue whether it is really an issue or not.
It has been said in print a million times since Nixon...it is not the crime itself but rather the cover-up. Many people use that same philosophy in every day life. Just throw the bad news out there and after awhile it is not news anymore.
Example: (maybe not the best but it is all I can think of right now) The day that you smash your car up it feels like the end of the world.....a month later it is all but forgotten.
I know this whole subject of a middle name can sound like nonsense....but it is what it is. If you make something sound like it is taboo...everybody wants to talk about it.Keedy

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

Yeah, I think it's OK for a person to use all of his given names...or not use them, as he/she sees fit.

We are really testing a new level of political criticism with discussion of people's given names, I think. I had nothing to say about the names my parents gave me, nor does anyone else that I ever heard of, including Barack Hussein Obama.

I ABSOLUTELY TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU VK !!!

HOWEVER, it was NOT OK during the primary or the campaign as I know you recall !

PS: Sen McCain was forced to apologize because a right wing radio host used the name Hussein during a Mc Cain rally
Here in Florida, in Lee County I believe, a candidate for sheriff was attacked for using President Obama's middle name and was actually INVESTIGATED as a result
Their is a left wing website that actually kept track of anyone who used this name during the campaign and then insured it was posted.