C,mon, fess up, are you regretting your vote?

[Joe_Penalty]

I beleive it's Casto's brother who will be left in charge of Cuba and Kim Jung Il's son who will be left in power in N Korea. They both are identical in thier belief systems of thier predecessors.

What premises or evidence makes you BELIEVE that the successors of either Castro or Kim Jung Il, has IDENTICAL belief systems?

 

[namvet]

[youtube]mm1KOBMg1Y8[/youtube]

 

[amrchaos]

Other factors lining up to add to Obamas legacy

Cuba- After 50 years of having an enemy within 90 miles of our coast, Castro is dying. Once a new regime takes over, the icy relationship will thaw resulting in reestablished ties

N Korea- After almost 60 years, Kim Jung Il is on his last legs. A regime change will open the door for some backdoor negotiating and less stressful relations as the new regime tries to improve a non-existent economy

Both are potential big tickets on Obamas legacy

It is possible--in fact most likely, that a dictorial regime will outlive the original dictaor.

In fact, North Korea already went through a regime change--passing from father to son(no, Kim Jung Il is following his papa's footsteps) and it is very possible that the regime in Cuba is going to stay in the hands of communist ideologues unless something radical happens on the island.

Also considering that these are communists regimes, both overthrowing a capitalistic system(N.Korea through Japanese Imperalism and World War II, Cuba due to Batista). It is more likely that they will slowly approach a mixed economy instead of jumping into Lassiez faire capitalism like the Russians. In fact, the Russian model is an impediment to rising Far right economic systems due to the chaos that arose in the 90s and the eventual rise of the Russian Ogliarchs. Thus a pragmatic look at history of other countries suggests that neither economic extremes are viable, and the desire to rush from one extreme to another can become disaterous.

The moderation of N.Korea and Cuba will take more than several years, and will outlive the Obama presidentcy. A clue to how this will occur is to look at Eastern Europe and East Asia as a potential role map of what to expect.

 

[nodoginnafight]

arguing about Obama's "legacy" after seven months in office is just silly - imho

His legacy will include being the first black American president, other than that, it's a crap shoot. I can understand looking at what you believe will weigh in - but at this point I have to say it's a crap shoot. But sure, he will benefit from following such a poor president.

 

[rightwinger]

Other factors lining up to add to Obamas legacy

Cuba- After 50 years of having an enemy within 90 miles of our coast, Castro is dying. Once a new regime takes over, the icy relationship will thaw resulting in reestablished ties

N Korea- After almost 60 years, Kim Jung Il is on his last legs. A regime change will open the door for some backdoor negotiating and less stressful relations as the new regime tries to improve a non-existent economy

Both are potential big tickets on Obamas legacy

It is possible--in fact most likely, that a dictorial regime will outlive the original dictaor.

In fact, North Korea already went through a regime change--passing from father to son(no, Kim Jung Il is following his papa's footsteps) and it is very possible that the regime in Cuba is going to stay in the hands of communist ideologues unless something radical happens on the island.

Also considering that these are communists regimes, both overthrowing a capitalistic system(N.Korea through Japanese Imperalism and World War II, Cuba due to Batista). It is more likely that they will slowly approach a mixed economy instead of jumping into Lassiez faire capitalism like the Russians. In fact, the Russian model is an impediment to rising Far right economic systems due to the chaos that arose in the 90s and the eventual rise of the Russian Ogliarchs. Thus a pragmatic look at history of other countries suggests that neither economic extremes are viable, and the desire to rush from one extreme to another can become disaterous.

The moderation of N.Korea and Cuba will take more than several years, and will outlive the Obama presidentcy. A clue to how this will occur is to look at Eastern Europe and East Asia as a potential role map of what to expect.

Nobody is saying that either regime will give up communism. However, both are desperately in need of capital investment. Look at the economy of VietNam vs N Korea. Both are communist. The US has normal trade and tourism with China and VietNam. There is no reason we can't normalize relations with Cuba and N Korea.

 

[Liability]

Nothing President Obama is doing or has planned is going to help him in historical perspective because he is a spectacular failure in the making. Sadly, the impact of what a massive failure he is will damage us for many years to come.

Please list the premises or reasons for you coming to this conclusion.

I have, already, repeatedly, in many of my posts. One more reitration will hardly do justice to it all.

His TARP thing is an unbelievably expensive and dangerous violation of Constitutional principles of limited government.

He is spending (or has sought authority for some ill-defined future spending) that even the CBO categorizes as "unsustainable." Well, if it is unsustainable, how the hell ARE we going to pay for it? Either we WON'T and this is beyond dangerously stupid because the upshot is that we are headed for massive hyper-inflation -- OR -- we WILL, and the ONLY way to do that is by MASSIVE TAXATION which is going to be the ruination of our capitalist foundations.

His "health care" plans are doubly problematical. They are ruinously expensive --especially in conjunction with all the other moronic massive deficit spending he is engaging us in -- and -- it amounts to a GOVERNMENT running our health care "system." Right now it is not a "system." But let the government get its tentacles into all of this (pharmaceutical companies, insurance, hospitals, doctors, nursing, etc etc etc) and it soon will become a beauracrartic NIGHTMARE of a system from which we might not be able, later, to extricate ourselves.

He has gotten his hands into insurance companies, the motor vehicle industry, etc in ways that defy proper Constitutional limits of government action.

His "green" agenda is just another way of taxing us and undermining the motor of the American capitalist system. And if you don't buy my analysis on this one, then why did he appoint a self-professed communist to the green industry czar position.

Screw his agenda. I WANT for us to have access to OIL and nuclear. Sure, clean water, we all want. Clean air, too. But there's a difference between seeking clean energy and denying us access to ANY domestic energy. Windmills, by the by, will not come even close to sufficing.

And what's with all these damn "czars" anyway? Isn't this still America?

Then we can turn to his national defense policies. They uniformly SUCK with the possible exception of Afghanistan (for which I had once given him credit and still remain prepared to grant him due credit). Let's just say it: they are TERRORISTS whom we are contending against! PLEASE, for the love of God, stop with the P.C. speak. It's truly okay to acknowledge that some of those bastards are terrorists. They are at war with us whether or not we admit that we are (or should be) at war with THEM!

Why is Iran permitted to be making nuclear weapons? What is truly "wrong" with destroying their capacity to create such weapons? When is it likely to make more sense to deal with what we all know they are doing? now or after they have created a few atomic bombs? Is this difficult stuff?

It would be VASTLY easirer to list all the things done or proposed (in concrete terms) by President Obama which I support (other than a willingness to fight more in Afghanistan against the Taliban nad al qaeda). Here's my list: .

Ok. That's enough for now.

 

[amrchaos]

arguing about Obama's "legacy" after seven months in office is just silly - imho

His legacy will include being the first black American president, other than that, it's a crap shoot. I can understand looking at what you believe will weigh in - but at this point I have to say it's a crap shoot. But sure, he will benefit from following such a poor president.

Carter followed Nixon--remember impeached Nixon?(Or, as some Republicans like to point out, GWB followed impeached Clinton!!)

Thus, this benefit you speak of is not a guarantee! In fact, it could be a detriment.

By the way--where is the Eisenhower of today's Republican Party? That is who we need!

 

[Maple]

Looks like Obama is shaping up to be one of the top ten presidents in US history, and the best president since FDR.

Looks like another landslide victory in 2012

I think that you wil be able to tell what's going to happen with the 2010 elections, it's gonna be a sunami. The 2008 election was hardly a landslide.

Rightwinger, I have to applaude your optimism in the face of the latest polling data, but I think that you are living in a fantasy world and can't seem to see the trees for the forest.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Looks like Obama is shaping up to be one of the top ten presidents in US history, and the best president since FDR.

Looks like another landslide victory in 2012

[youtube]
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/hnzHtm1jhL4&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/hnzHtm1jhL4&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]

 

[rightwinger]

Looks like Obama is shaping up to be one of the top ten presidents in US history, and the best president since FDR.

Looks like another landslide victory in 2012

I think that you wil be able to tell what's going to happen with the 2010 elections, it's gonna be a sunami. The 2008 election was hardly a landslide.

Obama won by a 2:1 margin

Democrats won big in the House, Senate, Governorships and down into local an municipal governments. republicans lost in all levels of government.

First class butt-kicking

More of the same in 2010

 

[Joe_Penalty]

[youtube]mm1KOBMg1Y8[/youtube]

What conclusion do you draw from this video?

 

[PoliticalChic]

I had 8 people in my family, including my husband who voted for Obama. None of them will vote for him again.

My husband is anti-union and found out after the fact that Obama is pro-union. Then last night he see's Van Jones on television making his racist statements and that just sent him over the edge. I warned all of them and told them that no-one goes to a church and listens to anti-american rhetoric and anti-white rhetoric for TWENTY YEARS and doesn't hear that stuff unless he believes it himself. The evidence is in:

Reverent Wright
Bill Ayers
Van Jones
and many more to come to light in the very near future.

So tell me about your freinds and family that would change thier vote now, if they could.

Lot of folks agree with your premise:
Published in the New York Post on September 2, 2009

This week's polls are a disaster for President Obama. The Rasmussen poll has his approval dropping to 45 percent, after several weeks at 49 percent. The Zogby poll has it even lower -- at 42 percent.

Worse yet, he's losing his political base:

* People under 30 -- long a key element of his support -- give him no better than break-even ratings, with 41 percent approving and 41 percent disapproving of the job he's doing, according to Zogby.

* Only 75 percent of Democrats, who formerly have supported Obama strongly, now approve of his performance in office. Zogby reports that this represents a slide of more than 10 points over the summer.

* Even among blacks, only 74 percent approve of the job he's doing (also a drop of more than 10 points).

* Hispanics, who voted for him by a margin of more than 40 points, now break even (36-36) when rating his performance.

Independents, the key swing group in our politics, now deliver a sharply negative 37-50 verdict on Obama's job performance. The elderly also give him negative ratings by 42-51.

 

[namvet]

[youtube]mm1KOBMg1Y8[/youtube]

What conclusion do you draw from this video?

obviously they didn't know shit from shinola

 

[Liability]

* * * *

Obama won by a 2:1 margin

* * * *

Not in THIS universe he didn't.

 

[rightwinger]

Rightwinger, I have to applaude your optimism in the face of the latest polling data, but I think that you are living in a fantasy world and can't seem to see the trees for the forest.

Poll: Obama Approval Rating Dips Slightly - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

56% Methinks the rumors of his demise are premature

fantasy world??

I have listed my reasons throughout this thread, while your side has done nothing better than "Obama Sucks"
He will go down in history as one of the great recent presidents for the reasons i listed

 

[rightwinger]

* * * *

Obama won by a 2:1 margin

* * * *

Not in THIS universe he didn't.

Presidents are elected by the electoral vote. If you need an explanation I suggest you contact President Al Gore

 

[namvet]

Rightwinger, I have to applaude your optimism in the face of the latest polling data, but I think that you are living in a fantasy world and can't seem to see the trees for the forest.

Poll: Obama Approval Rating Dips Slightly - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

56% Methinks the rumors of his demise are premature

fantasy world??

I have listed my reasons throughout this thread, while your side has done nothing better than "Obama Sucks"
He will go down in history as one of the great recent presidents for the reasons i listed

your talking to someone who can't tell left from right

 

[Liability]

* * * *

Obama won by a 2:1 margin

* * * *

Not in THIS universe he didn't.

Presidents are elected by the electoral vote. If you need an explanation I suggest you contact President Al Gore

Ah, but you did not say that he had won by a 2:1 margin in the ELECTORAL college. And you then compared the alleged Obama margin of victory to the fact that the Dims had won both houses of congress and a majority of State Houses -- none of which are governed by an electoral college -- leaving the distinct impression that you were claiming a 2:1 majority of the electorate had voted for President Obama.

You were just being deceptive or dishonest. Like your obviously bogus username.

Understood.

 

[nodoginnafight]

liability - you just keep digging yourself in deeper.

 

[rightwinger]

Not in THIS universe he didn't.

Presidents are elected by the electoral vote. If you need an explanation I suggest you contact President Al Gore

Ah, but you did not say that he had won by a 2:1 margin in the ELECTORAL college. And you then compared the alleged Obama margin of victory to the fact that the Dims had won both houses of congress and a majority of State Houses -- none of which are governed by an electoral college -- leaving the distinct impression that you were claiming a 2:1 majority of the electorate had voted for President Obama.

You were just being deceptive or dishonest. Like your obviously bogus username.

Understood.

Amazingly, republicans who were so in favor of the electoral system of electing presidents when Bush won in 2000, conveniently forget when it comes to Obama's 2:1 margin of victory. Any way you slice it, McCain never had a chance