Originally Posted by dklassen

Kool-aid. Obama passed it out people stepped right up to the bar. That's what happened in Nov of 2009.

What I mean by Kool-aid is when someone tells you the way out of your difficult financial situation is to max out all your credit cards, then go get more and the person says "sounds good to me."

I didn't drink any Kool-Aid. Nobody told me the way out of my trouble was to max out all of my credit cards and then get more and do it again.

Someone did tell me that we could spend a trillion dollars on a war, borrow that trillion from the Chinese so we could say we didn't raise taxes, try to justify that war in part by telling me there were WMDs that didn't exist. That same someone told me the way out of our trouble was to feed our insatiable thirst for fossil fuels by blowing off the tops of the mountains in Kentucky, Tennessee and West Virginia and plowing what's left over into what used to be rivers and streams, poisoning hundreds of square miles of watershed.

You see, not everyone who voted for Obama "drank the Kool-Aid". Some of us just looked at what GW's administration did to this country for 8 years and said, "we can't let this go on".

Originally Posted by Laker14

I didn't drink any Kool-Aid. Nobody told me the way out of my trouble was to max out all of my credit cards and then get more and do it again.

Someone did tell me that we could spend a trillion dollars on a war, borrow that trillion from the Chinese so we could say we didn't raise taxes, try to justify that war in part by telling me there were WMDs that didn't exist. That same someone told me the way out of our trouble was to feed our insatiable thirst for fossil fuels by blowing off the tops of the mountains in Kentucky, Tennessee and West Virginia and plowing what's left over into what used to be rivers and streams, poisoning hundreds of square miles of watershed.

You see, not everyone who voted for Obama "drank the Kool-Aid". Some of us just looked at what GW's administration did to this country for 8 years and said, "we can't let this go on".

While the Bush administration was far from perfect, how it responded to Al Qa'ida attacks on the homeland, and how it responded to thwart future attacks on the homeland was correct. If it costs 100 Trillion to keep the homeland safe, isn't it worth it? What's the alternative?

No administration - Clinton, Bush or Obama - forced (or is forcing) any private person to load up their Mastercard, and pay the bill with a new Visa card, or to buy a car/SUV/truck that g3ets less than 20 MPG, or buy a house which the mortgage was higher than the person could afford. Yet, there seems to b e a feeling that it's the responsibility of the White House to parent the public. When does the private person accept responsibility for his/her decisions to spend or act?

There's an old saying that "you can't legislate stupidity." If private persons do stupid things, or at least actions of which constitute frivolity, then it's their responsibility to accept the consequences of their actions - not expect their frivolity/stupidity to be projected to whoever resides in the White House.

If anyone sees Pres. Obama as their surrogate parent who shall bandage their financially skinned knee, raise their allowance, or bail them out for their child-like actions, they will be in for a shocking surprise. That's not his job. I've searched the Constitution from beginning to end, and can find nowhere within it which makes the president "Daddy."

Again, right back to Bush and glossing over all the current facts. Doesn't matter to anyone what Obama is doing just as long as they can keep trashing a former Presadent to divert attention from what's really going on. Can't do it forever my friends. Obama owns the economy now. It's his budget, his bail outs, his take overs, his redristrabution of weath, his taxes, his spending, his new programs and his new mountains debt that he is creating.

That same someone told me the way out of our trouble was to feed our insatiable thirst for fossil fuels by blowing off the tops of the mountains in Kentucky, Tennessee and West Virginia and plowing what's left over into what used to be rivers and streams, poisoning hundreds of square miles of watershed.

Oh brother.

ONLY. The responses are so canned it seems like all one has to do is pull the string and they play back.
It would be a pity if they voted against Bush and not for Obama....yes there is a difference. Instead of diatribe about ending the previous administration how about enlightening us about what it is Obama did....what he did....to earn your vote.
Yes we all agree he is a good teleprompter reader of prepared speeches. When he is off the cuff he is average using uh and um just like most do. He is a great story teller and is going to fix everything....we shall see. So far the trillions being pumped out of Washington have yet to get to we the people. So far words, words words.

Some of us will get our $250 booster from SS this month. That outta help the economy

BTK

That is why pictures are worth much more than the words....it just nails it!

Thanx for the visual aid.

BTK

PS yes I do appreciate all the Bush toons/characatures/and jokes too!!!

Originally Posted by SteveZ

While the Bush administration was far from perfect, how it responded to Al Qa'ida attacks on the homeland, and how it responded to thwart future attacks on the homeland was correct. If it costs 100 Trillion to keep the homeland safe, isn't it worth it? What's the alternative?

."

That attitude reminds me of the old Popeye cartoon, where Popeye is taking a nap, and a bug gets in his ear. He escalates his attempts to eradicate the bug from his life, until, in the closing scene, he his demolishing his own home with a shot gun. He winds up with no home left to protect, and he never does kill the bug.

No, I daresay, it would not be worth $100 trillion dollars, because at some point our resources would be so depleted we'd have no homeland left to protect.

.

Originally Posted by dklassen

Again, right back to Bush and glossing over all the current facts. Doesn't matter to anyone what Obama is doing just as long as they can keep trashing a former Presadent to divert attention from what's really going on. Can't do it forever my friends. Obama owns the economy now. It's his budget, his bail outs, his take overs, his redristrabution of weath, his taxes, his spending, his new programs and his new mountains debt that he is creating.
Again, right back to Bush and glossing over all the current facts. Doesn't matter to anyone what Obama is doing just as long as they can keep trashing a former Presadent to divert attention from what's really going on. Can't do it forever my friends. Obama owns the economy now. It's his budget, his bail outs, his take overs, his redristrabution of weath, his taxes, his spending, his new programs and his new mountains debt that he is creating.

Quote:
That same someone told me the way out of our trouble was to feed our insatiable thirst for fossil fuels by blowing off the tops of the mountains in Kentucky, Tennessee and West Virginia and plowing what's left over into what used to be rivers and streams, poisoning hundreds of square miles of watershed.
Oh brother.
______________


Oh brother.

Oh Brother. That's what I said when GW undid years of EPA work with the stroke of a pen. Must not bother you, since it isn't your back yard. Of course, it is somebody's back yard. Actually, it's a lot of people's back yards.

oh brother.

Originally Posted by Laker14

That attitude reminds me of the old Popeye cartoon, where Popeye is taking a nap, and a bug gets in his ear. He escalates his attempts to eradicate the bug from his life, until, in the closing scene, he his demolishing his own home with a shot gun. He winds up with no home left to protect, and he never does kill the bug.

No, I daresay, it would not be worth $100 trillion dollars, because at some point our resources would be so depleted we'd have no homeland left to protect.

That's where we differ.

Many good people have believed (and still do) there is no price, to include the ultimate one, that is too much to keep the homeland safe. So, while some consider this nation is worth dying for, others think it's only worth so much money and not a dime more.

Yes, we do have a cultural difference.

I think the State of New Hampshire got it right in 1945.

Originally Posted by SteveZ

That's where we differ.

Many good people have believed (and still do) there is no price, to include the ultimate one, that is too much to keep the homeland safe. So, while some consider this nation is worth dying for, others think it's only worth so much money and not a dime more.

Yes, we do have a cultural difference.

I think the State of New Hampshire got it right in 1945.

I think where we differ is in our opinion of whether or not the goal, worthy as it is, to make the homeland safe is:

a. achievable, and

b. achievable by military invasion of Iraq.

Originally Posted by Laker14

I think where we differ is in our opinion of whether or not the goal, worthy as it is, to make the homeland safe is:

a. achievable, and

b. achievable by military invasion of Iraq.

And it is normal for people of conscience to interpret facts differently. That's what makes the species homo sapiens so interesting.

Originally Posted by dklassen

Kool-aid. Obama passed it out people stepped right up to the bar. That's what happened in Nov of 2009.

What I mean by Kool-aid is when someone tells you the way out of your difficult financial situation is to max out all your credit cards, then go get more and the person says "sounds good to me."

Let me tell you about my Dad. He graduated 2 years early from high school at the age of 16, class valedictorian.
He is a WWII Vet.
During the war the Army sent him to LSU , where he finished #1 in his class.

After the war, while holding down a full time job, to support a wife and two kids, he resumed his education at Cornell, which had been interrupted by the war. He got his degree in Chemical Engineering, and finished 6th in his class.

When he retired he was the Division Head of International Engineering for a Fortune 500 company. He is, to this day, the smartest man I've ever known, both in terms of intellectual capacity, and "horse sense."

He voted for Obama.

I also know some damn smart people who voted for McCain.

To suggest that everyone who voted for a candidate did so out of ignorance, stupidity, or the desire to have something "handed" to him, is not only insulting, it makes you look really stupid.

I always ask people who voted for Obama to give me some specifics on his proposed policies that made you want vote for him.

More often than not I either get a blank stare or it was because they hated Bush. A few just plain liked the guy but knew very little about his actual plans. Kind of like the stimulus plan, lots of smart people voted for it but never actually read it.

A lot of the young people that voted for Obama did it because they thought it was the cool in thing to do. Most of them couldn't even give the name of our current Vice President and you know they don't have a clue about policy. Some of them were college grads.

I'm not referring to your dad but lots of big time colleges graduate highly educated people that believe socialism is truly the way to go. Well, they got their man.

Just as many "educated" people believe that free market, capitalism, limited government is the way to go. I believe a few of them even wrote our constitution.

Just as many "educated" people know that you can't get out of a financial pickle by spending money like a drunken sailor.

Originally Posted by dklassen

I always ask people who voted for Obama to give me some specifics on his proposed policies that made you want vote for him.

More often than not I either get a blank stare or it was because they hated Bush. A few just plain liked the guy but knew very little about his actual plans. Kind of like the stimulus plan, lots of smart people voted for it but never actually read it.

A lot of the young people that voted for Obama did it because they thought it was the cool in thing to do. Most of them couldn't even give the name of our current Vice President and you know they don't have a clue about policy. Some of them were college grads.

I'm not referring to your dad but lots of big time colleges graduate highly educated people that believe socialism is truly the way to go. Well, they got their man.

Just as many "educated" people believe that free market, capitalism, limited government is the way to go. I believe a few of them even wrote our constitution.

Just as many "educated" people know that you can't get out of a financial pickle by spending money like a drunken sailor.

There is NO, ABSOLUTELY NO DOUBT, in my mind that President Obama is President today because of the hate for GW Bush.

Other ingredients, of course, was the Republican candidate who I thought waged a very poor campaign and who I only supported as an alternative to Obama.

Imagine ANY candidate of any party running for President, at any time. who spent twenty years listening to a pastor preach hate and calling him his religious and personal mentor, who spent his ENTIRE career training under and with folks who believe in socialism and the downfall of captialism being elected our President.

I cannot conceive of someone like that ever getting close to even being a candidate, but the hate of GW Bush transcended everything and YES..folks wanted a new message NO MATTER WHAT THE MESSAGE, and that is what we got.

I predicted accuretly during the campaign where President Obama, AND IMPORTANTLY, in concert with the current congress would take us. He is moving that way quicker and stronger than even I expected. He say he is not about politics but meets 3 times a week with Axlerod to discuss nothing but politics...he is using the manual he learned so totally as a communtiy organizer.