Wednesday, April 11, 2012
The Obama Platform is what exactly?
I mean when things finally get down and dirty between him and Mr. Romney what is it shaping up to be or to put it another way why is it self-evident we should reelect the man? He can't run on the strength of his first term because there wasn't any at least that's not the word that comes to mind I'm sure even among his most ardent supporters. His main achievement would seem to be health-care reform and a majority of Americans are hardly behind him on that one so should he push it even if the SCOTUS strikes him down? He can always trot out of course the OBL Card but even here that video the news networks keep showing of bin Laden talking and the other one of him watching the boob tube wearing a wool cap looks like some B-actor out of a bad spoof (he found time to watch porn too?), too SNLish to have the gravitas of a world-master terrorist at work and maybe if I were the networks I'd keep it in the can. There's Obama's race to consider naturally and the nostalgia born from the historic and emotional moment of this country finally electing the first black president hasn't worn off and this is understandable, it was a good moment historically and it's like you want Tiger Woods back in the game. You can make the case that he played a major role in Khadafy's demise but even here he has been pretty much laid back on Syria and the regime of Bashar al-Assad. I believe at last count the death toll there of the citizenry stands like 9,000 or something so maybe when it reaches 10,000 he'll get off his duff. Taken as a whole, snowballing it altogether is all this reason enough for those who voted for him the first time to do so again? Of course for Shaw et al. it's a no-brainer but why would you not have a Democratic primary season especially when your main guy is so weak? My Dad who served in the Navy during WW2 and is as rock-ribbed conservative as they come said to me one day Hillary would've been a far better president than Obama. All you liberals out there make the case here because I'm not getting this one, it's way over my head:)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think the lack of responses says it all, Obama has ZERO to be proud of and to run a campaign on. Which is why his tactic is all about putting down his opponents. They successfully got Santorum out of the race early, because they knew Obama would have too tough a time running against him.
ReplyDeleteI think the lack of responses is directly proportional to the banned commenters...as the sole
ReplyDeleteliberal around, IMO, he inherited a mess-2 major military conflicts,
economy in the tank and a congress
that fought him every step of the way. Me? I shudder at the alternative!
Give me a break, BB, he can only use the tired excuse of "inheriting" for so long, first of all, he knew what he was "inheriting" when he ran for office, and he had no ideas on how to turn things around, he simply did more stupid stimulus that were dumb when Bush did them and throwing more money under Obama was extra stupid.
ReplyDeleteSecondly, Z-man didn't actually ban anyone, they are able to post here if they wish. His post was a hypothetical about banning those who disagree with him.
Sure 5 inch one, if you'll lighten up and give me a break.
ReplyDeleteBarack Obama, & Tiger Woods, are 2 peas in a pod.
ReplyDeleteTwo angry Blacks who are off their game!
I'm not sure how it came about that I banned Saty and Shaw. The post I did was a creative one that what IF I had banned them they'd feel a suppression of their free speech and that'd anger them even though their 1st Amendment rights were in no way violated and THAT was the exact same argument they were using to call for a boycott of Rush's show, just my use of creative irony. Never actually banned them though if they read the comments there but I did delete a couple of Shaw's comments because she can't seem to post without calling me a hypocrite or some other derogatory name and I don't think it's too much to ask for a minimal respect shown the host. I was getting more than a little irritated with the lack of civility here, my God it's only politics! She had an issue with me not deleting others' comments about her fast enough and just gimme a break! I'm working and have to rely on public computers and had to go through the comments in question but I found myself agreeing with her and deleted said comments. I'm actually a little tired of this false issue of I banned them, maybe they wanna spin it that way and as for Shaw calling commenters here "anti-women" she can't do that because I've judged that to be a personal and ad hominem swipe at other conservative posters here but I have no problem if she rephrases this in a general way as "Republicans or conservatives in general are anti-women" although I still think it's a silly argument.
ReplyDeleteGot it!?!
BB as for your support of Obama you're entitled but even putting my conservatism aside and looking at the situation totally objectively I don't see how the case for Obama's reelection is that strong to begin with. So since his first term wasn't a strong one you have to fall back on things like what you just said, he inherited many problems and they take time to work themselves out but I think Beth is right there comes a certain time when you can't blame Bush anymore. Also maybe Bush inherited problems from Mr. Clinton but did we hear liberals cut him any slack? Your line of argument isn't horrible but it has to be consistently applied like if Romney becomes president will liberals say he inherited problems from Obama and we should take that into consideration? Something tells me ain't gonna happen.
ReplyDeleteRE: "my God it's only politics!"
ReplyDelete-Amen-
Like I think Saty debates like a prosecutor ("ANSWER THE QUESTION, STILL WAITING FOR AN ANSWER!"), probably I've done so at times myself esp. on pro-life and Shaw thinks all Republicans are evil not just misguided (does she seriously think hatred of women is what animates them/us?) but I'd like to think of this place not so much like a barroom but the cafe at Barnes & Noble. Well that's a little boring, maybe everybody sitting on the patio with cigars and cold ones but nobody gets hurt ya know?
ReplyDeleteI don't know who Saty is, but I have been reading the crap that Shaw spews, and it's such garbage that I have to give up reading it.
ReplyDeleteI'm gonna check it out in a bit myself. This is a comment that is perfectly defensible btw: the point being that Shaw expresses crap, her POV's so that doesn't reach ad hominem in my opinion. Saty not that long ago said my writing was full of paranoia and I thought fair enough maybe I said something that wasn't expressed well, I'll look into it and so when I asked her to be more specific she just said in general but didn't elaborate. Oh that helps so after awhile I deleted the comment since it added nothing to the debate which I don't even remember what we were talking about in the first place.
ReplyDeleteSaty dropped from your blog roll for a bit there but you have no idea how either her or Shaw were banned from commenting.
ReplyDeleteMmmm kay......
Z-man, I always understood that post of the banning to be about just that one post, not the whole blog...
ReplyDeleteMaybe this is the last time I'll be creative. That blog was a hypothetical one designed to make them appreciate the value of free speech more. If Rush were taken off the air his 1st Amendment rights would still be intact they kept saying so I used their same argument to say if I banned them too then their 1st Amendment rights would not be violated but you still get pissed when someone suppresses your free speech. The point of the post was suppression of speech but they in effect have banned themselves by not commenting so can't help that.
ReplyDeleteIf Rush walked into an Idaho bar
ReplyDeleteand called a logger or cowboy's daughter a slut...he would be
broadcasting with a serious listhp.