Originally Posted by Bucco

There is NO relationship between this thread and the one you began. ...

Not sure if this particular post is a "commerical" for your others but it does not speak to the subject in anway !

You're right, Bucco. The other thread I began a few days ago was intended to completely disregard the personalities, history and expectations regarding the old and new political administrations. It was intended to begin a dialog on what solutions seem to exist to resolve the financial crisis, which should be adopted, and why.

My intent was to leave behind any dialog regarding the personalities of our political leaders and focus on a new and totally impersonal question of what should be done to reverse our economic decline and begin to rebuild the U.S. economy. If that interests you, I'd enjoy your reply in the other thread. If discussion of the personalities in our political leadership is of greater interest, threads like this one might be more to people's liking.

Re: an earlier post

Actually the financial storm started many months ago and there were many intelligent folks who foresaw what was coming down the pike (Ron Paul, for instance). For most politicians including Bush and McCain we were merely experiencing a "bump in the road". Even a financial neophyte could see that was not the case and the situation was much worse and the potential damage was very serious.

As to Obama's campaign promises, I'm not surprised about the back pedaling. I was certain that once he got his eyes on the National Intelligemce Assesment and got more info on the way things really were financially, he'd realize the financial problems would eat up his campaign hopes.

One could say that his daily doomsaying is a scare tactic, but I'd rather think it is more a policy of telling folks like it is...VERY SERIOUS. Americans are a resourceful lot, and armed with the facts, usually make good decisions. Up until now, all we've been fed is pablum which many have chosen to accept without looking behind the curtain.

There are so many factors WORLDWIDE working against financial stability it's hard to see where the "stimuli" packages will have any meaningful effect here. Not to mention the fact that the deficit has gone vertical. Great news for us, our kids, grandkids, and great grands.

Originally Posted by Bucco

1. Your implication that we who opposed President Elect Obama are hoping for the worse is, at best, partisan and speaks to what others say on here and else where that with you folks, you either must adore or butt out

In addition, listening to news broadcasts concerning the President elect is anything but objective !

2. To imply with your "He has mine" comment that we who opposed his election do not pray for the President elect is somewhat....cant think of the word but I find it offense. Do not judge me or others with your partisan views...it is just not fair.

3. I cannot understand and never will understand how it became the logic that if we do not adore we are against the President of the United States....I never heard, read or heard that implied anywhere.....why do you keep insuation that we, who opposed his election, are somehow second class people ?

Our current President has been under PERSONAL, not policy, attack for the last 5 years...I do not hear anyone attacking the President Elect on a personal level, but you expect everyone to stand tall and not disagree with anything he says.....explain why ?

Adore means to love and worship!

No one is asking anyone to "adore" the new President. I, personally, am saying, "Just give the guy a chance!". Wow, he's walking into problems on all fronts that no other President in history has faced all at once.

I remember some of these same posters urging people to support President Bush in the war in Iraq. "Support your President!" Well, that's all I'm saying here about President Obama. "Support your President."

BTW, the current President Bush was under policy attacks, not personal attacks, don't fool yourself. Face that fact, if nothing else.

Originally Posted by chelsea24

Adore means to love and worship!

No one is asking anyone to "adore" the new President. I, personally, am saying, "Just give the guy a chance!". Wow, he's walking into problems on all fronts that no other President in history has faced all at once.

I remember some of these same posters urging people to support President Bush in the war in Iraq. "Support your President!" Well, that's all I'm saying here about President Obama. "Support your President."

BTW, the current President Bush was under policy attacks, not personal attacks, don't fool yourself. Face that fact, if nothing else.

I am being asked on here to stop criticizing policies I do not think are correct. Now, that to me is asking total and complete subjugation !!!!

I keep saying everyone is going to support him BUT NOT BLINDLY as it seems you would prefer.

Oh, and if you are looking for personal attacks on the current President, just look in this thread for the IQ remark. It has been and continues to be personal about the current President. Much of his policy needs to be critiqued and I will join that but the personal crap and that is what it is, crap...is way out of line.

I will suppport whomever is my President, but will not ever do blindly and will say I disagree when I do. I am reserving my comments on such things at GTMO until I hear his remarks on such and will never attack him personally nor his family as seems to be the norm in many corners.

Originally Posted by captain1202

Re: an earlier post

Actually the financial storm started many months ago and there were many intelligent folks who foresaw what was coming down the pike (Ron Paul, for instance). For most politicians including Bush and McCain we were merely experiencing a "bump in the road". Even a financial neophyte could see that was not the case and the situation was much worse and the potential damage was very serious.

As to Obama's campaign promises, I'm not surprised about the back pedaling. I was certain that once he got his eyes on the National Intelligemce Assesment and got more info on the way things really were financially, he'd realize the financial problems would eat up his campaign hopes.

One could say that his daily doomsaying is a scare tactic, but I'd rather think it is more a policy of telling folks like it is...VERY SERIOUS. Americans are a resourceful lot, and armed with the facts, usually make good decisions. Up until now, all we've been fed is pablum which many have chosen to accept without looking behind the curtain.

There are so many factors WORLDWIDE working against financial stability it's hard to see where the "stimuli" packages will have any meaningful effect here. Not to mention the fact that the deficit has gone vertical. Great news for us, our kids, grandkids, and great grands.

Well said. Also, the increasingly bleak outcast on the economy only became more evident later in his campaign, and as you said, once he got his hands on all the data he's had to change his priorities to match what has changed in the world. If he tried to keep up with some of his campaign promises in the face of negative spiral of the economy, it would be criminal. I do like the fact I think he is feeding us the facts. I don't necessarily agree with the stimulus package as it stands, but that remains to be hashed out by congress.

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

You're right, Bucco. The other thread I began a few days ago was intended to completely disregard the personalities, history and expectations regarding the old and new political administrations. It was intended to begin a dialog on what solutions seem to exist to resolve the financial crisis, which should be adopted, and why.

My intent was to leave behind any dialog regarding the personalities of our political leaders and focus on a new and totally impersonal question of what should be done to reverse our economic decline and begin to rebuild the U.S. economy. If that interests you, I'd enjoy your reply in the other thread. If discussion of the personalities in our political leadership is of greater interest, threads like this one might be more to people's liking.

I respect all you say and have read every post in your other thread. I am not qualified nor am I able to structure things as you and others can do and as such I learn a lot from reading there.

I responded to this thread and immediately it became a bash Bush thread.

Look, President Obama is going to be criticized, and you supporters cannot yell race or bash Bush every time that happens. And it always gets down to the personal level with folks discussing the President (see remarks on IQ). I have never, and frankly have never heard any, personal remarks about President elect Obama.

Somehow this thread became something I do not think BTK meant it to be. BTK simply made a comment about the backpedaling and I agreed with him. It was not aimed specifically at the financial situation at all.

Somehow it became a bash Bush festival from there.

Listen, your thread and most of your posts are great for reading and in my case sending me out to study a bit. As I said I dont like your taking shots at every chance at the last years ignoring those democrats who failed the country in the congress, but that is the nature of politics and I can read around that at times. My not posting in one of those kind of threads is simply an indication that I have nothing to add of any substance but do enjoy reading the comments of you and others.

substantially off subject. The usual mix is ever present and welcome obviously. The other usual that is ever present is, the threads when taken off subject usually wind up in a my guy is better than your guy. And of course there is the consistent droning and deteriorating to the level of measuring/bashing Bush...no matter the subject.

This thread has been erroneously categorized as a "...discussion of personalities..."

From VK' latest post...."If discussion of the personalities in our political leadership is of greater interest, threads like this one might be more to people's liking".

This thread was not submitted as a discussion of personalities. The subject matter was very specifically aimed at performance....promises made VS promises kept. If one would go back to the beginning and note the not so subtle transition (polite for hijack) from the subject of the thread to the usual thrumming of personalities.

I don't think the answer to holding the deterioration of political threads to "discussions of personalities" at bay is to post a political thread under a different forum.

In my humble opinion, it should be more appropriate to request in a Political thread that responses should not be personality discussions by actually pointing out the subject of the thread. I have tried this in the past to no avail as it seems there are those who have a single purpose/objective and that is to slant every discussion to personality bickering.

If taking a political subject, with a no personality discussion wanted guideline works simply by posting it in another forum, then why not place the subject in the appropriate forum with the same requested guideline? We are all dealing with what we think we read or our individual interpretation thereof VS the writer's actual intent VS what some participants would rather the subject be (no matter what). I know, how about we request a new non discussion of personalities political thread.

Anyway, see ya at the other forum to monitor success of the adherence to the request.

BTK

inference his post was to be in a different forum than political I must plead guilty to one of my references of...what was posted VS what I thought I read...
So all that is germaine in my post above is the wrongful categaorization of my thread as a personality discussion.

....don't ya just hate when you catch yourself with the egg on the face??

BTK

"The Economy" has certainly become as big and interesting a subject as "Political". Maybe it needs it's own forum.

If such a forum was established, maybe the discussion would be more on economic theory and less on the personalities that create economic policy. Doubtful, but possible I suppose.

BTK: I'm sorry but I don't understand. You say "with a message every single day that either paints things blacker (no pun intended)..." I admit I almost closed the thread right there and now wish I had listened to my little inner voice. Sorry, but if you say "no pun intended" you mean you intended something but are being coy. I thought I'd read the entire thread before giving up. It went on: "first because he is a politician"... "second he is a lawyer".... I don't get it. None of those reference personality?

In general: I heard about this site in early October. As a newbie I got so discouraged reading TOTV political posts that I stopped reading them by the end of October. In response to my few posts: I didn't mind having my toes stepped on but didn't care for the heavy stomp of the rhetorical boots. Having recently read the warning about personal attacks, I just stopped by to see if the over-all tone is different. Guess I shouldn't stop in again. Same paint brushes, same artists, same results.

I pray our new president is able to find some light with which to guide us in the next year. I pray Congress, all of Congress, wakes up and does what is best for all of us. I pray we see improvement in the status of our country in the next four years.

If Congress does what's best for all of us (rather than the special interest groupe, PAC's and lobbyists) ..... well that certainly would be "change".

Originally Posted by cmj

...
...
I pray our new president is able to find some light with which to guide us in the next year. I pray Congress, all of Congress, wakes up and does what is best for all of us. I pray we see improvement in the status of our country in the next four years.

While I believe in the Power of Prayer, I also believe that God helps those who help themselves.

The President is not the equivalent of an Old Testament prophet. He may have Teddy Roosevelt's "Bully Pulpit," but Congress controls what legislation is processed and the pursestrings as well. The President is not the public's ombudsman in DC.

Congress - that 9% approval rated group - will never "wake up." It as an institution has no reason to, as long as over 90% of the incumbents have over 15-20-30-40 in office. You will never see any "change" there without concurrent personnel change.