What has Obama done well?

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by Angry

1. Iraq had nothing to do with the attack on American soil. You cannot fight a war against terrorists on a typical battlefield. The terrorists that attacked the U.S. were sent by a man hiding in Afghanistan. But you are right, Bush had the balls to persuade less intelligent people like you that going into Iraq was what we needed to do. Now before you start questioning my patriotism, realize that I was there. I could argue on and on about the war, but I would rather point out that you’re a hypocrite.

A lot more to the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 than links to 9/11.

Iraq Resolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

George Tenet (Clinton hold-over) provided the intel to Bush, Colin Powell, Sens. Tom Daschle (sponsor), Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Diane Feinstein, John Kerry, Joe Liberman, Harry Reid, and Jay Rockefeller (Intel Committee) must all be included in the "less intelligent" category too. And Obama must be at least partially included too for voting to approve over $ 300B in funding for the war.

2. You said thanks for telling you how to spend your money. Isn't that what America does every day by telling countries that they cannot invest in their nuclear programs?

No. You may want to read up on the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

3. You say that I want money for healthcare and I am for abortion. Let’s get one thing straight. I am for healthcare, but nobody is for abortion! There are just people out there that realize that there are circumstances that exist in which abortion is the lesser of 2 evils. If a woman is raped and she does not want to keep a child...I understand. If the mother has 50% chance of survival and the child has zero...I understand. You guys have to stop thinking in terms of it's this way or that way, and realize the grey areas out there.

As firstdown mentioned, the VAST majority of abortions are completely voluntary. For those that view abortion as murder, they don't want to be forced to participate or fund abortions through their tax dollars.

4. Only you can prevent narrow mindedness. Do you really think that by adopting universal healthcare that we would actually allow a person into their 90's to just die? We as a society would not allow this. You guys bitch about how much money Obama is spending and how much is coming out of your pocket and you truly believe that the government is just going to take your money let grandma die? That's good old Republican cynicism at its best. Nothing like some good ole hell and damnation preaching! Grandma is going to be OK, so are your son, your father and anyone else. The good news is that there are also going to be people that never had healthcare before that are going to be OK as well.

When providing treatment is done via a cost-benefit analysis in terms of "life years", then there will be a reduction in services to the elderly and treatments may not be provided that would either enhance life (hip-replacements, etc.) or prolong life (transplants, etc.). I have first hand experience in watching services to my father be reduced when he was forced to transfer from a private insurance plan to Medicare. So don't be naive, reduction in services to the elderly will happen and happens everyday in the UK & Canada.

Good article from the WSJ:

ObamaCare Will Lead to Rationed Care for Elderly - WSJ.com

I'm sure you wouldn't want this in the U.S.
Elderly left at risk by NHS bidding wars to find cheapest care with reverse auctions - Times Online

Also, here is some information on the Complete Lives System and by Emmanuel's own words this system "disrciminates against older people". The "death panel" thing is Glen Beck-esque garbage, but the fact is under a Gov't option services to the elderly will be reduced.

Ezekiel J. Emanuel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The framework for the cost-benefit decision-making has already been approved in Obama's stimulus bill:

From the link:
Elderly Hardest Hit
Daschle says health-care reform “will not be pain free.” Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them. That means the elderly will bear the brunt.
Medicare now pays for treatments deemed safe and effective. The stimulus bill would change that and apply a cost- effectiveness standard set by the Federal Council (464).
The Federal Council is modeled after a U.K. board discussed in Daschle’s book. This board approves or rejects treatments using a formula that divides the cost of the treatment by the number of years the patient is likely to benefit. Treatments for younger patients are more often approved than treatments for diseases that affect the elderly, such as osteoporosis.
In 2006, a U.K. health board decreed that elderly patients with macular degeneration had to wait until they went blind in one eye before they could get a costly new drug to save the other eye. It took almost three years of public protests before the board reversed its decision.
Ruin Your Health With the Obama Stimulus Plan: Betsy McCaughey - Bloomberg.com

[dmek25]

Originally Posted by Angry

As I sit here typing away in my underwear I realize that people have nothing better to do than to bitch about something. Well, I am an independant and have no preference toward either party or cause. I will tell you this. Obama has taken more action on more issues than any other president this century. Whether you think it is right or wrong makes no difference. He said that he was going to make chande and so far he has. No matter what youu may think, his changes have been with the intent of making things better and not worse. For once we have a President that has the nuts to stand up and do what he believes is right. All we want to do is bash him.

Stop being pissed that your party lost and try to realize that he wants what is best for the majority. If you have to give up starbucks and 8 cyllinder engines so that those less fortunate can have health care, then so be it. Heaven fobid that a cup of coffee and a sports car are more important than anothers life.

this is one of the best posts offered on this board

[wolfeskins]

Originally Posted by dmek25

this is one of the best posts offered on this board

your opinion sucks. :tongue

[dmek25]

Originally Posted by wolfeskins

your opinion sucks. :tongue

well at least you didnt say i sucked

[wolfeskins]

Originally Posted by dmek25

well at least you didnt say i sucked

never, your a skins fan. your almost like family.

[RiggoRanger]

hooskins, that is really lame of you to call me 'uneducated' on the issue.

It isn't conspiracy theory, linking Obama to these terrible people--it's common knowledge. If you've ever read Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals" you'd be able to see his methods employed by Obama. Heck, Obama taught a course based on Alinsky methods. You're heard the Jeremiah Wright speeches, and Bill Ayers was a close friend and political partner of his. Obama is the company he keeps.

I have read HR3200, and it's a terrible bill. I don't understand what the rush is to do this, when we're in a recession and 80% of us are happy with our health care coverage. Why not start by targeting tort reform and frivolous lawsuits, to get costs down, and work towards insuring those who can't be insured due to their circumstances? Why destroy the best system in the world for the benefit of the few? Are you familiar with the VA? I have many military friends and have heard the horror stories. That is government-run healthcare for you, and it is where we'll be headed--rationing and waiting lines. Whatever will keep costs down.

I'd like to hear your take, hooskins, on what Obama has done well. Explain to me how Cap and Trade is going to be to our benefit? How will it create jobs and strengthen our economy? What is the net-worth of Obama's Stimulus Bill, other than putting us trillions into debt--how has it helped our economy and curbed unemployment? You might recall, this one was rushed through to save us from going above 8% unemployment--that's what Obama promised us. Now we're above 9.5% and we'll be at 10% soon. Where am I wrong? Walk me through it.

Calling someone who shares a different view 'uneducated' illustrates my point perfectly. I don't know what your politics are, but this is a classic tactic of the left; when they can't debate, they resort to name calling. Anyone who doesn't agree with them is an idiot, because they're SO convinced they're right. It is what compels them do such things as raise taxes, redistribute wealth and empower government to run every aspect of our lives. Screw liberty and individual freedom--it's for the good of the people (the uneducated).

[dmek25]

im with saden. TTE, whats the major problem with Obama showing another leader some respect? is it kind of like someone going to another country and expecting them to speak english? us darn arrogant Americans

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by dmek25

im with saden. TTE, whats the major problem with Obama showing another leader some respect? is it kind of like someone going to another country and expecting them to speak english? us darn arrogant Americans

Well, when we go to another country, we bring interpreters, and vice versa when they come here. Bowing to a "king" is not a sign of respect as much as it is submission. It shows Obama's willingness to be submissive to another country and their ways, and in affect say "I'm sorry for america". That's the problem. We don't believe in anarchy here. In fact, we have forced other nations to be democratic. So to bow to a "king" shows lack of respect for this country and our ways. It has nothing to do with arrogance. If the king came here, do you think he would all of sudden be democratic in hs ways while on american soil? I don't think so. So why do we need to conform to their ways? It's not disrespectful to treat him with respect in regards to our culture.

In regards to the positive things Obama has done, some are very good and I wasn't aware. That was the point of this thread.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by dmek25

im with saden. TTE, whats the major problem with Obama showing another leader some respect? is it kind of like someone going to another country and expecting them to speak english? us darn arrogant Americans

I am so shocked by this. You, Saden, in agreement???? Is this the first time in Warpath history? AMAZING!

[Trample the Elderly]

Originally Posted by dmek25

im with saden. TTE, whats the major problem with Obama showing another leader some respect? is it kind of like someone going to another country and expecting them to speak english? us darn arrogant Americans

First of all, when you say us darned arrogant Americans you need to speak for yourself.

Second, the President of the United States doesn't bow before anyone, nor does any American. Showing respect means a handshake, for an officer it means a salute. When we were trained in dealing with foreign officials, to include Monarchs, it was very clear, you do not bow before anyone. If a schmuck PFC can understand that, I see no reason why his commander in chief cannot?

Going to another country and expecting them to speak English? Again, speak for yourself.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Trample the Elderly

First of all, when you say us darned arrogant Americans you need to speak for yourself.

Second, the President of the United States doesn't bow before anyone, nor does any American. Showing respect means a handshake, for an officer it means a salute. When we were trained in dealing with foreign officials, to include Monarchs, it was very clear, you do not bow before anyone. If a schmuck PFC can understand that, I see no reason why his commander in chief cannot?

Going to another country and expecting them to speak English? Again, speak for yourself.

Who says exactly?

[saden1]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Who says exactly?

A fella named Pride Ignorance.

[Trample the Elderly]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Who says exactly?

I don't know of the Civic Code. The race is coming on and I don't feel like looking it up. For military personel it is the (American) Armed Forces Code of Conduct. A military officer or enlisted man who bowed before a King would be brought before NJP at the least.

The President doesn't bow for the same reason that the flag is not lowered, dignity. He isn't just some schmuck off the street. He is the representative of this Republic. When he bows he does so on our behalf.

(Taken from U.S. Code, Title 10, Chapter 36, Sec. 176. Respect for flag)
No disrespect should be shown to the flag of the United States of America; the flag should not be dipped to any person or thing. Regimental colors, State flags, and organization or institutional flags are to be dipped as a mark of honor.

Is the Flag more important than the President?

A bow, courtsey, or kow-tow isn't a sign of respect. It is a sign of subservience. Should you choose to do so means you are subservient.

Choose the sign of serfdom if you will, an American should only bow before God. If this doesn't make sense to you, I am disheartened at your understanding of patriotism.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by Trample the Elderly

I don't know of the Civic Code. The race is coming on and I don't feel like looking it up. For military personel it is the (American) Armed Forces Code of Conduct. A military officer or enlisted man who bowed before a King would be brought before NJP at the least.

The President doesn't bow for the same reason that the flag is not lowered, dignity. He isn't just some schmuck off the street. He is the representative of this Republic. When he bows he does so on our behalf.

(Taken from U.S. Code, Title 10, Chapter 36, Sec. 176. Respect for flag)
No disrespect should be shown to the flag of the United States of America; the flag should not be dipped to any person or thing. Regimental colors, State flags, and organization or institutional flags are to be dipped as a mark of honor.

Is the Flag more important than the President?

A bow, courtsey, or kow-tow isn't a sign of respect. It is a sign of subservience. Should you choose to do so means you are subservient.

Choose the sign of serfdom if you will, an American should only bow before God. If this doesn't make sense to you, I am disheartened at your understanding of patriotism.

Well, when you have time please let us know where it says what you claim in the Military Code of Conduct. And just to be clear it says nothing of that sort whatsoever.

And yes, the Flag is more important than the president...this is very obvious to even someone like me who believes flag burning in protest is permissible.

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by Trample the Elderly

(Taken from U.S. Code, Title 10, Chapter 36, Sec. 176. Respect for flag)
No disrespect should be shown to the flag of the United States of America; the flag should not be dipped to any person or thing. Regimental colors, State flags, and organization or institutional flags are to be dipped as a mark of honor.

Ha! What about when a flag is lowered to half-mast for the passing of a President? Just one of many examples of contradiction within our policies. Good job proving your point.