planetf1.com

It is currently Tue Sep 25, 2018 9:16 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules





Post new topic Reply to topic

Obama rate his presidency.
A 12%  12%  [ 3 ]
B 48%  48%  [ 12 ]
C 20%  20%  [ 5 ]
D 4%  4%  [ 1 ]
F 16%  16%  [ 4 ]
Total votes : 25
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 5:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6348
Location: Nebraska, USA
Steve C wrote:

I thought I did a good enough job explaining.

The ones who cannot make it we completely help. These are the truly poor. Again, we conservatives are the compassionate ones, we just think that the human being is better off making most decisions. The ones that cannot make those decisions are always going get the need.

Steve, you are walking a line that most conservatives would never walk, claiming to be the compassionate ones... as though the others are not. I rather resent the implication. Are those really in need always going to get the need? It hasn't happened yet, there are many in need who do not receive it.

I never said I could fix it all but believe that doing it the same way we've been doing it for decades and expecting a different result is just wrong. Wait, that's a definition for something...

Your words, "Give me the power to give to the needy and there won't be any needy." That sounds like you think you have the answer for all... there wont' be any needy???

You said earlier that our schools need rebuilding and the roads I'd expect is in that pot as well, so, put those on welfare who can work on rebuilding the schools and roads.
Yes, I said that I had no problem with letting those who are capable work for their money, such as resurecting the WPA. As I said, most people like to think that they are earning their way, give them the chance to do it, while addresssing some of our needs, no problem with me. Yes, there will be those who don't want it, just as there are those who abuse the system, and again, I have no problem with eliminated the abuse, as I have said before.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 5:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6348
Location: Nebraska, USA
HawaiiF1Fan wrote:
AstoriaisBACK wrote:
I agree with Blake, saying you get help then you can't vote is a terrible position to take. We are a nation of people that help others, food stamps, unemployment and welfare are social programs that help our people and should be maintained at all costs.




I do to agree that something of this nature then yes the Govt should help and yes those people should still be allowed to vote..............however I think that the way in which welfare is handled is seriously flawed.

When you go to a store and see people on welfare buying booze, shrimp, steak, lobster, cigs with welfare.............yeah that doesn't sit well with me. Given that some of this is not compensable, but how the rules are enforced needs some serious oversight and accountability, two things which big government is not known for.


Hawaii,

I have stated elsewhere that there is abuse in the system, and I too would like to see it eliminated. Seeing that kind of abuse does not sit well with me either. I am not sure if policing things such as this can be done at the local level, or the state level. I do know that it will take more people than they already have to probably really police it.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 6:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 1:40 pm
Posts: 6628
Steve C wrote:

Prema, I'm not really sure what you're problem is. This is a motosports forum and it's an international one at that. Why was this question asked here? What business on this forum does it have to be here?

OK, so, with his speech last night, are you telling me that what he said is good, about the protection of the 5 million from deportation? Is this a good thing for him to do?

OK, you're showing your colors, which is ok with me. Our borders should be closed except for those who follow the rules to get in. You see, I believe that we are the most open society on the planet but there are rules to get in. You believe in rules, right? We cannot (although some say we should) send all the illegals home but we can find out who they are and make sure they get punished (mostly by paying a fine(s)). America is in a world of hurt and we cannot afford to take care of everyone anymore.

You may not like our Constitution but it is ours.


Look, as I have already mentioned, it is the OP of this thread that provided the space for the international character of the discussion:

Quote:
Its Obama's second term and knowing this is somewhat an international website I want to know how you guys rate Obama as a president


But so much hostility and intolerance from your side. I don't need that. Sure, I will leave this thread to you as you apparently won't let non-American posters in, you keep chasing them away. I may not be an American, but I have no issues with America and the Constitution there, nor I do hate Americans. I am not perhaps en enemy of yours showing his colors. Though I may be opposing your point of views, so you seem to assume that you are representing America and the Constitution.

It is my fault that I dared to stand in defence of the President of the USA that is being called here a "total joke" and show some respect to him and his Administration. So go after me, the enemy of America... But better to leave.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 1:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 290
Prema wrote:
Steve C wrote:

Prema, I'm not really sure what you're problem is. This is a motosports forum and it's an international one at that. Why was this question asked here? What business on this forum does it have to be here?

OK, so, with his speech last night, are you telling me that what he said is good, about the protection of the 5 million from deportation? Is this a good thing for him to do?

OK, you're showing your colors, which is ok with me. Our borders should be closed except for those who follow the rules to get in. You see, I believe that we are the most open society on the planet but there are rules to get in. You believe in rules, right? We cannot (although some say we should) send all the illegals home but we can find out who they are and make sure they get punished (mostly by paying a fine(s)). America is in a world of hurt and we cannot afford to take care of everyone anymore.

You may not like our Constitution but it is ours.


Look, as I have already mentioned, it is the OP of this thread that provided the space for the international character of the discussion:

Quote:
Its Obama's second term and knowing this is somewhat an international website I want to know how you guys rate Obama as a president


But so much hostility and intolerance from your side. I don't need that. Sure, I will leave this thread to you as you apparently won't let non-American posters in, you keep chasing them away. I may not be an American, but I have no issues with America and the Constitution there, nor I do hate Americans. I am not perhaps en enemy of yours showing his colors. Though I may be opposing your point of views, so you seem to assume that you are representing America and the Constitution.

It is my fault that I dared to stand in defence of the President of the USA that is being called here a "total joke" and show some respect to him and his Administration. So go after me, the enemy of America... But better to leave.


Since this is an OP thread as you say, you can have your opinion. I'm still not sure you should be rating my president though.

"Won't let non-American poster is" Come on Man, don't be a wuss and go away with that statement because it means nothing. You seem much smarter than that.

When someone does a poll like this it is always best to ask each person voting where they come from and what do they expect the president to do. I'm doing just that.

The people who like Obama believe that he should be helping them. The people that didn't like him believe that he's not suppose to help them. I call him Santa Claus because far too many Americans believe he's suppose to help them.

I can continue to discuss this but would rather talk Formula One.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 3:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 10:57 pm
Posts: 3124
Why would we discuss F1 in the off topic board? ;)

As he cant judge your president does that mean Americans shouldn't have judged Suddan Husseins regime? Or Putins regime.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 3:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6348
Location: Nebraska, USA
What in the hell is wrong with people from outside the US rating the President? They have opinions, and quite frankly, I rather value knowing how they view him and the presidents before him. This is a world that consists of many countries, we are not isolated. We have relationships with other countries, some good, some bad, but International relations are critical to our health as a country. So, why does it bother you so much that they have opinions about how our president has done his job? Perhaps because they see it differently than you do, therefore "skew" the poll in a direction that you do not like?

I felt that one of Obama's biggest tasks upon taking office was to rebuild our International relationships after the disaster that preceded him, and in many ways, he has done that. We should value that, or at least I do.

This is a poll on an international website, you cannot realistically expect only Americans to vote or have a say.


Now, about your generalities.... "THe people who like Obama believe that he should be helping them. The people who didn't like him believe that he's not supposed to them". That is even more ridiculous than the statement about those receiving aid should not be allowed to vote. Of all the asinine characterizations I have seen in here, that is right near the top. Please do not pretent to speak for Americans, and I suspect that many a conservative would ask you not to pretend to speak for them either.

There are many reasons as to why someone could like or dislike Obama that do not fall into your very limited characterizations. Some may like him because they believe that he has tried to fix a health care system that left huge gaps in people covered, put many at risk because they could not get insurance and could not afford health care. Some may like him because of the way he has improved our international relations. Some may like him because he has not automatically endorsed the Keystone Pipeline. Some may dislike him because they feel that he has cost us jobs by not endorsing the Keystone Pipeline. Some may not like him because they don't like the idea of a President using Executive Orders to push something that he couldn't get past congress, even if it was an obstructionist congress. Some may even dislike him because of his color. Oh, I can hear it now... the "Race card", liberals always pull out the "race card". I will tell you this, there are many (unfortunately) in this country who still struggle with this, and if you are honest with yourself, you will admit. On the other hand, there are those who like him because of his race.

How many of the conservatives that say you represent, Steve, turn down things that they receive from the Federal government? Are the conservatives in congress turning down their health insurance that they get that is not tied into Medicare, that is guaranteed? I seriously doubt it. Are they refusing to let welfare programs help members of their families who may perhaps be receiving them? I doubt it. Are they turning down disaster assistance from the government because they believe that the government/President is not supposed to help them? Of course they aren't. We all get help from the government, and when it benefits us, it is fine, but when it does not, when it benefits others but not us, the there seems to be a tendency to resent it.

Steve, the point is you cannot make a overly simplistic blanket characterizations such as you did, it just isn't that easy... nor is fair to those who reasons other than a hand-out to support Obama.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 3:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6348
Location: Nebraska, USA
pubpokerplayer wrote:
Why would we discuss F1 in the off topic board? ;)

As he cant judge your president does that mean Americans shouldn't have judged Suddan Husseins regime? Or Putins regime.


pub... one of the few times we actually agree! Mark it on the calendar!

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 4:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 290
Blake wrote:
What in the hell is wrong with people from outside the US rating the President? They have opinions, and quite frankly, I rather value knowing how they view him and the presidents before him. This is a world that consists of many countries, we are not isolated. We have relationships with other countries, some good, some bad, but International relations are critical to our health as a country. So, why does it bother you so much that they have opinions about how our president has done his job? Perhaps because they see it differently than you do, therefore "skew" the poll in a direction that you do not like?

I felt that one of Obama's biggest tasks upon taking office was to rebuild our International relationships after the disaster that preceded him, and in many ways, he has done that. We should value that, or at least I do.

This is a poll on an international website, you cannot realistically expect only Americans to vote or have a say.


Now, about your generalities.... "THe people who like Obama believe that he should be helping them. The people who didn't like him believe that he's not supposed to them". That is even more ridiculous than the statement about those receiving aid should not be allowed to vote. Of all the asinine characterizations I have seen in here, that is right near the top. Please do not pretent to speak for Americans, and I suspect that many a conservative would ask you not to pretend to speak for them either.

There are many reasons as to why someone could like or dislike Obama that do not fall into your very limited characterizations. Some may like him because they believe that he has tried to fix a health care system that left huge gaps in people covered, put many at risk because they could not get insurance and could not afford health care. Some may like him because of the way he has improved our international relations. Some may like him because he has not automatically endorsed the Keystone Pipeline. Some may dislike him because they feel that he has cost us jobs by not endorsing the Keystone Pipeline. Some may not like him because they don't like the idea of a President using Executive Orders to push something that he couldn't get past congress, even if it was an obstructionist congress. Some may even dislike him because of his color. Oh, I can hear it now... the "Race card", liberals always pull out the "race card". I will tell you this, there are many (unfortunately) in this country who still struggle with this, and if you are honest with yourself, you will admit. On the other hand, there are those who like him because of his race.

How many of the conservatives that say you represent, Steve, turn down things that they receive from the Federal government? Are the conservatives in congress turning down their health insurance that they get that is not tied into Medicare, that is guaranteed? I seriously doubt it. Are they refusing to let welfare programs help members of their families who may perhaps be receiving them? I doubt it. Are they turning down disaster assistance from the government because they believe that the government/President is not supposed to help them? Of course they aren't. We all get help from the government, and when it benefits us, it is fine, but when it does not, when it benefits others but not us, the there seems to be a tendency to resent it.

Steve, the point is you cannot make a overly simplistic blanket characterizations such as you did, it just isn't that easy... nor is fair to those who reasons other than a hand-out to support Obama.


OK, I can see that i'm in over my head here. I know this will set you and the other non-Americans off, but I could care less what others think about America. The Muslims have been fighting each other for thousands of years, they hate us and will always hate us. It hasn't changed under Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II and now Obama.

Again, I ask, what is the Gov't suppose to do? Is it to help you put your pants on in the morning? Is it to feed you? Cloth you? Make sure your job pays you enough to live on? Or is it to make sure I have a fair chance at life and the decisions I make will help in determining who I am? This is the discussion that it is so hard to get the left to discuss and once we discuss these things we might be able to get ourselves back on our feet and start prospering again.

Generally speaking, the left in this country tends to think Obama is good because they believe that Obama is here to help them. Generally speaking, the right in this country would rather he and our Very Blotted Gov't get out of the "people's" way so we can fix our problems.

Welfare wasn't meant to be a life source, right? Again, people down on their luck should have a way to get back on their feet BUT it shouldn't last years.

I'm glad you pulled the "race" card (yes, you didn't pull it) because I could care less what color someone is just as long as he or she can do the job (refer back to my question about what the Gov't is supposed to do). I don't like him because he doesn't stand for the values I hold true. He wants to fundamentally change America and his view is wrong.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 4:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 290
Blake wrote:
pubpokerplayer wrote:
Why would we discuss F1 in the off topic board? ;)

As he cant judge your president does that mean Americans shouldn't have judged Suddan Husseins regime? Or Putins regime.


pub... one of the few times we actually agree! Mark it on the calendar!


So, are either of you two going to tell us here that any US president is the same as Saddam Hussein?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 4:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 1:40 pm
Posts: 6628
Steve C wrote:
Since this is an OP thread as you say, you can have your opinion. I'm still not sure you should be rating my president though.


You may be very vocal about supporting Freedom and the Constitutional Rights such as the basic one of a Freedom of Speech, but in practice you cannot see it existing further than your own self. I may go rating any public figure, be it your favorite F1 driver or your president, without your approval or even understanding. It is in my rights. Period.

The President of the USA is a very much a public figure, referred to sometimes also as "The Leader of the Free World". His decisions may, and do make an impact on the lives of hundreds of millions of people outside of the USA for both better and worse. Even my own life may be affected by what he does, not to speak of those extreme instances of hundreds of thousands people who lost their lives in the aftermath of the President of the USA deciding to start what was called "pre-emptive" war against their country. Many of those people might have not even had known his name, yet they died as the consequence of his decision. And here we are... a non-American goes to... what exactly? Yeah, he goes to... rate your President! Your president. No problem to go and kill someone else's president on the base of fabricated "evidence" of WMD and have hundreds of thousands of people there to die. But to go and rate your president, that appears too much for you to absorb, too much to tolerate, too much to understand how it can be. And, behold shock and awe! I dared to rate your president... positively!.

Who are you so to go depicting me as someone showing his colors as a hater of America just because I go rating your president in a positive way? Are you for real? We have just have had the Islamist extremists go killing the journalists/caricaturists in Paris for their depicting their Prophet Muhammad in the way they found insulting to them and their Prophet. And here we are.. your President (he is not even a Prophet really yet, is he?) is being rated positively by the side of a non-American, and look, you got issues with that and you can't comprehend how that can be just fine.

If I was to praise the President of the USA in some, to me unknown place, and then be chased away for doing that, I would think that I by some mistake got myself into some kind of Islamist radical place. But no, it's... an American that got his stick at me.

Quote:
"Won't let non-American poster is" Come on Man, don't be a wuss and go away with that statement because it means nothing. You seem much smarter than that.


It may mean nothing to you since you are not the recipient of your discriminative aggression. The way you treated me, a non-American, and the way you treated your fellow con-patriots, is more than obvious.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 4:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 10:57 pm
Posts: 3124
Steve C wrote:
Blake wrote:
pubpokerplayer wrote:
Why would we discuss F1 in the off topic board? ;)

As he cant judge your president does that mean Americans shouldn't have judged Suddan Husseins regime? Or Putins regime.


pub... one of the few times we actually agree! Mark it on the calendar!


So, are either of you two going to tell us here that any US president is the same as Saddam Hussein?


That isn't the point. The point is why can you have an opinion on one but not the other? Because one is leader of America and the other isn't?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 4:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 10:57 pm
Posts: 3124
Steve C wrote:
I'm glad you pulled the "race" card (yes, you didn't pull it) because I could care less what color someone is just as long as he or she can do the job (refer back to my question about what the Gov't is supposed to do). I don't like him because he doesn't stand for the values I hold true. He wants to fundamentally change America and his view is wrong.


You do realize it is couldn't care less? If you could care less that implies that his colour does cloud your judgement.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 4:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6348
Location: Nebraska, USA
Steve C wrote:
OK, I can see that i'm in over my head here. I know this will set you and the other non-Americans off, but I could care less what others think about America.


It may come as a surprise to you, but it shouldn't since Nebraska is one of the most Republican states in the union, but I am an American. Me and the other non-Americans??? Other non-Americans.

Just because we are on opposite ends politcially does not mean that you can banish me as an American, no matter how much you may wish to do so.
;)


Or perhaps it is that you feel that because I have voice support for Obama, I surely cannot be an American? Do me a favor, do NOT follow up on any political ambitions you might have, this country cannot afford it.
:nod:

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 5:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 290
Prema wrote:
Steve C wrote:
Since this is an OP thread as you say, you can have your opinion. I'm still not sure you should be rating my president though.


You may be very vocal about supporting Freedom and the Constitutional Rights such as the basic one of a Freedom of Speech, but in practice you cannot see it existing further than your own self. I may go rating any public figure, be it your favorite F1 driver or your president, without your approval or even understanding. It is in my rights. Period.

The President of the USA is a very much a public figure, referred to sometimes also as "The Leader of the Free World". His decisions may, and do make an impact on the lives of hundreds of millions of people outside of the USA for both better and worse. Even my own life may be affected by what he does, not to speak of those extreme instances of hundreds of thousands people who lost their lives in the aftermath of the President of the USA deciding to start what was called "pre-emptive" war against their country. Many of those people might have not even had known his name, yet they died as the consequence of his decision. And here we are... a non-American goes to... what exactly? Yeah, he goes to... rate your President! Your president. No problem to go and kill someone else's president on the base of fabricated "evidence" of WMD and have hundreds of thousands of people there to die. But to go and rate your president, that appears too much for you to absorb, too much to tolerate, too much to understand how it can be. And, behold shock and awe! I dared to rate your president... positively!.

Who are you so to go depicting me as someone showing his colors as a hater of America just because I go rating your president in a positive way? Are you for real? We have just have had the Islamist extremists go killing the journalists/caricaturists in Paris for their depicting their Prophet Muhammad in the way they found insulting to them and their Prophet. And here we are.. your President (he is not even a Prophet really yet, is he?) is being rated positively by the side of a non-American, and look, you got issues with that and you can't comprehend how that can be just fine.

If I was to praise the President of the USA in some, to me unknown place, and then be chased away for doing that, I would think that I by some mistake got myself into some kind of Islamist radical place. But no, it's... an American that got his stick at me.

Quote:
"Won't let non-American poster is" Come on Man, don't be a wuss and go away with that statement because it means nothing. You seem much smarter than that.


It may mean nothing to you since you are not the recipient of your discriminative aggression. The way you treated me, a non-American, and the way you treated your fellow con-patriots, is more than obvious.


Wow, kind of high on yourself. Oh well...

Listen, I'm not trying to be aggressive in any way. You've taken all this the wrong way. YES, I stand with you and say you can have your opinion. There is and never was a problem with you doing so. I never said you couldn't have an opinion. I did day I wasn't sure how a non-American can really vote on how well he's doing but I agree that his actions can in fact have something to do with how other things happen in the world. I apologize for not communicating that fact very well.

I do think you hate America and perhaps hate is too strong of a word BUT it doesn't matter to me just as long as you can articulate your message (which you've done very well). Remember two days ago or so when I aid I'll come out of any discussion learning something? I'm always wanting to hear the other side of things because I ain't perfect and will always strive to better myself.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 5:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 290
Blake wrote:
Steve C wrote:
OK, I can see that i'm in over my head here. I know this will set you and the other non-Americans off, but I could care less what others think about America.


It may come as a surprise to you, but it shouldn't since Nebraska is one of the most Republican states in the union, but I am an American. Me and the other non-Americans??? Other non-Americans.

Just because we are on opposite ends politcially does not mean that you can banish me as an American, no matter how much you may wish to do so.
;)


Or perhaps it is that you feel that because I have voice support for Obama, I surely cannot be an American? Do me a favor, do NOT follow up on any political ambitions you might have, this country cannot afford it.
:nod:


You said you were a teacher, I'm guessing English wasn't your subject...

When I used the term non-Americans, I was referring to the people on this thread that weren't American (I'd hope I wouldn't have to explain that). I know you're from Nebraska and you're an American. We are on different sides BUT we both want America to be great again, right? We both want Americans to have jobs, right? We probably want the same things but have different methods to get there, right?

Peace...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 5:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2014 11:05 am
Posts: 1054
I do chuckle slightly when someone refers to Obama as being part of "the left". America doesn't have a left really, I guess the closest you've got to a prominent left-wing politician is Bernie Sanders. The Republicans and Democrats are "very right-wing" and "slightly less right-wing" respectively.

_________________
Image
"You mad, bro?"

"Noise is a form of energy and the less you hear means the more you use for propulsion" - Ulrich Baretzky


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 5:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 290
pubpokerplayer wrote:
Steve C wrote:
I'm glad you pulled the "race" card (yes, you didn't pull it) because I could care less what color someone is just as long as he or she can do the job (refer back to my question about what the Gov't is supposed to do). I don't like him because he doesn't stand for the values I hold true. He wants to fundamentally change America and his view is wrong.


You do realize it is couldn't care less? If you could care less that implies that his colour does cloud your judgement.


Ah, thanks. Perhaps the auto-correct kicked in. My bad


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 5:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6348
Location: Nebraska, USA
Steve C wrote:
Blake wrote:
Steve C wrote:
OK, I can see that i'm in over my head here. I know this will set you and the other non-Americans off, but I could care less what others think about America.


It may come as a surprise to you, but it shouldn't since Nebraska is one of the most Republican states in the union, but I am an American. Me and the other non-Americans??? Other non-Americans.

Just because we are on opposite ends politcially does not mean that you can banish me as an American, no matter how much you may wish to do so.
;)


Or perhaps it is that you feel that because I have voice support for Obama, I surely cannot be an American? Do me a favor, do NOT follow up on any political ambitions you might have, this country cannot afford it.
:nod:


You said you were a teacher, I'm guessing English wasn't your subject...

Nor was English your subject. You said.... "I know this will set you and the other non-Americans off." In doing so, you imply that it is ME and the other non-Americans (grouping me with non-Americans). If you had said, "you and the non-Americans" leaving the word OTHER out of the phrase, then you would have been right, as it is, sorry but I believe this Art teacher's English was not as bad as you think.
;)

When I used the term non-Americans, I was referring to the people on this thread that weren't American (I'd hope I wouldn't have to explain that). I know you're from Nebraska and you're an American. We are on different sides BUT we both want America to be great again, right? We both want Americans to have jobs, right? We probably want the same things but have different methods to get there, right?

On that, yes, we do agree.

Peace...

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 6:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 1:40 pm
Posts: 6628
Steve C wrote:
Listen, I'm not trying to be aggressive in any way. You've taken all this the wrong way. YES, I stand with you and say you can have your opinion. There is and never was a problem with you doing so. I never said you couldn't have an opinion. I did day I wasn't sure how a non-American can really vote on how well he's doing but I agree that his actions can in fact have something to do with how other things happen in the world. I apologize for not communicating that fact very well.


Calling into question the qualification or/and capacity of a non-American individual to rate the American President, that may be one thing. As already pointed out to you, if you take a blank stance in this instance, then you will have to apply the same judgmental approach towards any American in the case of them judging/rating just any non-American head of a state or a non-American political figure. And that what you call "voting" here, is nothing more nothing less but just people's opinions anyway.

But that what I was responding strongly to at this instance was rather not you wondering how I can rate him, but:

"I'm still not sure you should be rating my president though."

Well, unless he's your wife... it's a free world, man.

But the apology accepted, so perhaps we have made some peace on this one.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 6:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 290
Blake wrote:
Steve C wrote:
Blake wrote:
Steve C wrote:
OK, I can see that i'm in over my head here. I know this will set you and the other non-Americans off, but I could care less what others think about America.


It may come as a surprise to you, but it shouldn't since Nebraska is one of the most Republican states in the union, but I am an American. Me and the other non-Americans??? Other non-Americans.

Just because we are on opposite ends politcially does not mean that you can banish me as an American, no matter how much you may wish to do so.
;)


Or perhaps it is that you feel that because I have voice support for Obama, I surely cannot be an American? Do me a favor, do NOT follow up on any political ambitions you might have, this country cannot afford it.
:nod:


You said you were a teacher, I'm guessing English wasn't your subject...

Nor was English your subject. You said.... "I know this will set you and the other non-Americans off." In doing so, you imply that it is ME and the other non-Americans (grouping me with non-Americans). If you had said, "you and the non-Americans" leaving the word OTHER out of the phrase, then you would have been right, as it is, sorry but I believe this Art teacher's English was not as bad as you think.
;)

When I used the term non-Americans, I was referring to the people on this thread that weren't American (I'd hope I wouldn't have to explain that). I know you're from Nebraska and you're an American. We are on different sides BUT we both want America to be great again, right? We both want Americans to have jobs, right? We probably want the same things but have different methods to get there, right?

On that, yes, we do agree.

Peace...


Ha, English wasn't my subject. I always find it funny when people on forums want to correct what's written or counts "uhs" instead of what's really said. I'm ok with that, it's just funny. I don't type either, can you tell?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 6:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 290
Blake wrote:
Steve C wrote:

I thought I did a good enough job explaining.

The ones who cannot make it we completely help. These are the truly poor. Again, we conservatives are the compassionate ones, we just think that the human being is better off making most decisions. The ones that cannot make those decisions are always going get the need.

Steve, you are walking a line that most conservatives would never walk, claiming to be the compassionate ones... as though the others are not. I rather resent the implication. Are those really in need always going to get the need? It hasn't happened yet, there are many in need who do not receive it.

I never said I could fix it all but believe that doing it the same way we've been doing it for decades and expecting a different result is just wrong. Wait, that's a definition for something...

Your words, "Give me the power to give to the needy and there won't be any needy." That sounds like you think you have the answer for all... there wont' be any needy???

You said earlier that our schools need rebuilding and the roads I'd expect is in that pot as well, so, put those on welfare who can work on rebuilding the schools and roads.
Yes, I said that I had no problem with letting those who are capable work for their money, such as resurecting the WPA. As I said, most people like to think that they are earning their way, give them the chance to do it, while addresssing some of our needs, no problem with me. Yes, there will be those who don't want it, just as there are those who abuse the system, and again, I have no problem with eliminated the abuse, as I have said before.


Blake, I'm sorry, I let this one pass without talking about it.

Most conservatives I know are compassionate. We do care about people because most of us believe in God and his teachings. We also believe, mainly from our upbringing, that we can make better decisions about of lives that the Big ole Gov't . I will not allow the media or you (don't take it personally) to describe me. I am compassionate and will help my fellow man out in almost any way.

When we talk about giving to the needy, we talk about giving to many charities and giving to our churches. Many of the people I go to church with and many of the people I work with are doing the same things and understand the same things. We don't want to just give a fish to a poor person but we ant to give him a fishing pole and teach him to fish for himself.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 6:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 1:40 pm
Posts: 6628
Steve C wrote:
I do think you hate America and perhaps hate is too strong of a word BUT it doesn't matter to me just as long as you can articulate your message (which you've done very well).


I think we can make peace on that one too. I've been going on here as Alonso hater, Kimi hater, Lewis hater... so we may just as well add 'America hater' to that list of mine. :nod:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 6:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6348
Location: Nebraska, USA
yeah, Prema the "hater"! No wonder you and i have gone around on things so often!
:lol:

You just have to learn some flower power, Prema.
;)

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 7:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 3:29 pm
Posts: 909
Steve C. Wow. Just wow.

You articulate quite well, so I'm shocked that you are so sheltered. Please get out more. Your views, on even such simple notions as discussing politics on the "Off Topic" forum of a racing forum or non-US residents having the ability to rate our president given our president and our country have knock-on effects all around the globe, are mindblowingly narrow.

_________________
[ Kimi Raikkonen ]
2007 Formula 1 World Drivers Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 10:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 290
Honda Quick wrote:
Steve C. Wow. Just wow.

You articulate quite well, so I'm shocked that you are so sheltered. Please get out more. Your views, on even such simple notions as discussing politics on the "Off Topic" forum of a racing forum or non-US residents having the ability to rate our president given our president and our country have knock-on effects all around the globe, are mindblowingly narrow.


I guess the simple notion of rating a president of a country that you don't belong to is more than just simple.

The underlying message I was trying to get across and it passed by most of you, is that rating a person such as a leader on what they did or didn't do would be very difficult if you really didn't understand what he was suppose to do in the first place. However, after reading the responses, I may have made a mistake. You go right ahead and rate him but, please, don't be upset if I ask - Why


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 11:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6348
Location: Nebraska, USA
No, Steve, I think that it is you that the thread "passed by". The original post for the thread reads:

Quote:
Its Obama's second term and knowing this is somewhat an international website I want to know how you guys rate Obama as a president. Personally he has been a big letdown I would rate him at most a C-.


It doesn't say only Americans can have a viewpoint. It doesn't say rate his economic impact only in the US. It doesn't say anything about domestic policies at all. It gives people of the forum a chance to rate Obama's presidency. It is you who has chosen to attempt to limit it to things that you are most passionate about, and I think you are uspet that a president you so dislike has scored better than you would score him, much better. So, it is like you are attempting to trivialize the opinions of those who gave him an "A" or a "B" as though surely only a non-American could possibly grade him that high as they don't really know anything about "my" president.

There are many factors that non-Americans are very entitled to form opinions about when it comes to American presidents that are in reality quite legit, as though they really needed justification. As was posted by Honda, what this country does, positive and negative, has an impact on much of the world. That world has a right to an opinion, and some have voiced it here... as is their right. Where does it say in our constitution the you have said you are defending, that only Americans have a right to freedom of speech when it comes to Americans? Hint: it doesn't. Heaven knows we Americans don't hesitate (though often we should) to voice our thoughts about other countries and their leaders... all to often embarrassingly so.

There are some in here who deal with international clients in their work, could they not have an opinion, a valid opinion, of business and US policies of this administration based on that interaction and how it affect their business model? Sure they could. Perhaps some in here are very in-tune with the ecology, and either respect or resent administration responses to things such as that conservation, in this country and in theirs. That would be a legit opinion. And there is always, unfortunately, the miitary actions, and not often enough non-action. Why would a person from another country, say India, not be able to voice a legitimate "rating" of the administration about that?

As Honda said, you have created a very narrow framework and then all but demanded that everybody work within that frame. It wasn't your "frame" to create... and it has caused you some problems because of it. You can ask "Why", but they can answer, or not, it is their choice.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 290
Blake wrote:
No, Steve, I think that it is you that the thread "passed by". The original post for the thread reads:

Quote:
Its Obama's second term and knowing this is somewhat an international website I want to know how you guys rate Obama as a president. Personally he has been a big letdown I would rate him at most a C-.


It doesn't say only Americans can have a viewpoint. It doesn't say rate his economic impact only in the US. It doesn't say anything about domestic policies at all. It gives people of the forum a chance to rate Obama's presidency. It is you who has chosen to attempt to limit it to things that you are most passionate about, and I think you are uspet that a president you so dislike has scored better than you would score him, much better. So, it is like you are attempting to trivialize the opinions of those who gave him an "A" or a "B" as though surely only a non-American could possibly grade him that high as they don't really know anything about "my" president.

There are many factors that non-Americans are very entitled to form opinions about when it comes to American presidents that are in reality quite legit, as though they really needed justification. As was posted by Honda, what this country does, positive and negative, has an impact on much of the world. That world has a right to an opinion, and some have voiced it here... as is their right. Where does it say in our constitution the you have said you are defending, that only Americans have a right to freedom of speech when it comes to Americans? Hint: it doesn't. Heaven knows we Americans don't hesitate (though often we should) to voice our thoughts about other countries and their leaders... all to often embarrassingly so.

There are some in here who deal with international clients in their work, could they not have an opinion, a valid opinion, of business and US policies of this administration based on that interaction and how it affect their business model? Sure they could. Perhaps some in here are very in-tune with the ecology, and either respect or resent administration responses to things such as that conservation, in this country and in theirs. That would be a legit opinion. And there is always, unfortunately, the miitary actions, and not often enough non-action. Why would a person from another country, say India, not be able to voice a legitimate "rating" of the administration about that?

As Honda said, you have created a very narrow framework and then all but demanded that everybody work within that frame. It wasn't your "frame" to create... and it has caused you some problems because of it. You can ask "Why", but they can answer, or not, it is their choice.


Rather than just reading what you want in my message, try actually reading my message.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 14, 2015 5:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 7:56 pm
Posts: 1705
Location: Hawaii
Blake wrote:
HawaiiF1Fan wrote:
AstoriaisBACK wrote:
I agree with Blake, saying you get help then you can't vote is a terrible position to take. We are a nation of people that help others, food stamps, unemployment and welfare are social programs that help our people and should be maintained at all costs.




I do to agree that something of this nature then yes the Govt should help and yes those people should still be allowed to vote..............however I think that the way in which welfare is handled is seriously flawed.

When you go to a store and see people on welfare buying booze, shrimp, steak, lobster, cigs with welfare.............yeah that doesn't sit well with me. Given that some of this is not compensable, but how the rules are enforced needs some serious oversight and accountability, two things which big government is not known for.


Hawaii,

I have stated elsewhere that there is abuse in the system, and I too would like to see it eliminated. Seeing that kind of abuse does not sit well with me either. I am not sure if policing things such as this can be done at the local level, or the state level. I do know that it will take more people than they already have to probably really police it.



I think we agree on the bad results, but don't agree about getting there. FWIW I don't think it's a party thing. This is a big Govt thing as in the Govt really sucks at doing their jobs and being accountable for their failures. IMHO more people to police the system is not required, it's about enforcing what's already on the books by having the system actually have it's workers do their jobs.

I've dealt with the Fed & the State Govts on my projects and they pretty much suck. Oddly enough the smaller Govt departments actually provide better feedback and oversight. The larger the department you deal with IMHO the worse they get because of their institutionalized structures.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 14, 2015 5:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6348
Location: Nebraska, USA
:lol:

steve, you are the one who missed out on the thread, huffing and puffing about others "judging" the president. You are the one who attempted to narrow the scope of the thread. I have read what you wrote and wrote... many of us have... and several of us are more than a little amazed at some of your stances.

We are going in circles now so I think I will get off the merry-go-round

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 14, 2015 8:38 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 1:40 pm
Posts: 6628
Blake wrote:
yeah, Prema the "hater"! No wonder you and i have gone around on things so often!
:lol:

You just have to learn some flower power, Prema.
;)


Trying, trying... "Prema" is "Love" in Sanskrit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 290
Blake wrote:
:lol:

steve, you are the one who missed out on the thread, huffing and puffing about others "judging" the president. You are the one who attempted to narrow the scope of the thread. I have read what you wrote and wrote... many of us have... and several of us are more than a little amazed at some of your stances.

We are going in circles now so I think I will get off the merry-go-round


You and Prima are the ones huffing and puffing not I. I never said either of you nor anybody else here can't have an opinion. You read that, I didn't write it.

I'm sure you're amazed, you are liberal.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 9257
Blake wrote:
Steve C wrote:
OK, I can see that i'm in over my head here. I know this will set you and the other non-Americans off, but I could care less what others think about America.


It may come as a surprise to you, but it shouldn't since Nebraska is one of the most Republican states in the union, but I am an American. Me and the other non-Americans??? Other non-Americans.

Just because we are on opposite ends politcially does not mean that you can banish me as an American, no matter how much you may wish to do so.
;)


Or perhaps it is that you feel that because I have voice support for Obama, I surely cannot be an American? Do me a favor, do NOT follow up on any political ambitions you might have, this country cannot afford it.
:nod:

You do a much better job of (inadvertently) representing your country around here Blake :thumbup:

_________________
Räikkönen - Vettel - Bottas
Thank you Nico - You´re the champ!

PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2016: CHAMPION (2 wins, 8 podiums)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2011 1:59 pm
Posts: 5180
Steve C wrote:
Blake wrote:
:lol:

steve, you are the one who missed out on the thread, huffing and puffing about others "judging" the president. You are the one who attempted to narrow the scope of the thread. I have read what you wrote and wrote... many of us have... and several of us are more than a little amazed at some of your stances.

We are going in circles now so I think I will get off the merry-go-round


You and Prima are the ones huffing and puffing not I. I never said either of you nor anybody else here can't have an opinion. You read that, I didn't write it.

I'm sure you're amazed, you are liberal.

2 pages ago I asked it you could elaborate on your views and even if I don't agree with them you have done so, so thank you. You have seemed to go on the offensive here against those who don't share your views and huff and puff yourself, but as far as non-American's having a view of the US president I think it is very important. Someone else mentioned before that he is sometimes called the leader of the free world, this is my eyes is incorrect and a patriotic Americanism making out that America is the free world and so is not correct.

He is however an important world leader and whoever holds the seat of president of the United States of America does affect millions of non-american's around the world as America is a world power and a highly influential country. Hell, they took the UK to war with them in Iraq under false pretenses and the UK knowingly followed along.

I don't get this obsession you (and other American's) seem to have over conservative and liberal, especially when even those who are deemed liberal are often more conservative than we deem our own conservatives to be! These things however are more important to you as an American than to non-American's who also have views about the president and see him as an individual sharing his countries views with the rest of the world. To us, what matters is how his administration effects us (and it does) and what America is doing under his leadership to help or hinder the rest of the world.

For me, Obama is a good president. He comes across as a good man and a strong leader who understands America's role in the world and has tried to undo the damage that the Bush's administration did to America's reputation in this part of the world. And yes, whether you like it or not, Bush was almost seen as a joke to most people I know in the UK. I was personally more scared that he would start WWIII than any terrorist group would. Not the American people, but Bush and his administration. And his party really hasn't done much for me in persuading me otherwise since he left office with the likes of McCain, Palin and Romney and the way that congress has been seen to operate during Obama's presidency also makes the whole American political system look like a joke, I mean what government shuts down in protest because they're not happy with their democratically elected leader?

I've got to be honest, I only mentioned McCain, Palin and Romney because most of the recent Republican presidential candidates have all blended into 1 rich white, forcefully Christian, businessman and those 3 are the only ones I actually remember the names of. The problem I have with that is that I shouldn't have to say white or Christian, skin colour and religion don't make a difference to me, but it seems that they do to the American voters that these people were campaigning towards. Why wold skin colour matter in a country founded by immigrates of numerous nationalities and African's whose ancestors were brought over forcefully but now share the same rights as all Americans? And why did a number of them say that they would bring the country back to it's Christian values? Firstly, I didn't know that the country was based on Christian values, more like simply decent values that are shared by most religions, and also both these things are included in the US constitution and it's amendments saying that all religions and people have the same rights (I know that it can and has been interpreted differently, but to the best of knowledge it was written and amended with equality for all in mind). And these people look to me as being very dangerous people to be leaders of such an influential country with an important place in world politics. In my eyes, America made the right decision at the past 2 elections.

And as far as discussing this on a motorsport forum, I think you can agree that it is by and large (especially the off-topic forum) a civilized place to have a discussion, with no personal abuse, no major trolling and more mature discussing of differing opinions than you would find on almost any other online community.

_________________
There is no theory of evolution, just a list of animals that Chuck Norris allows to live.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2014 11:05 am
Posts: 1054
Covalent wrote:
Blake wrote:
Steve C wrote:
OK, I can see that i'm in over my head here. I know this will set you and the other non-Americans off, but I could care less what others think about America.


It may come as a surprise to you, but it shouldn't since Nebraska is one of the most Republican states in the union, but I am an American. Me and the other non-Americans??? Other non-Americans.

Just because we are on opposite ends politcially does not mean that you can banish me as an American, no matter how much you may wish to do so.
;)


Or perhaps it is that you feel that because I have voice support for Obama, I surely cannot be an American? Do me a favor, do NOT follow up on any political ambitions you might have, this country cannot afford it.
:nod:

You do a much better job of (inadvertently) representing your country around here Blake :thumbup:

Blake for president :D !

_________________
Image
"You mad, bro?"

"Noise is a form of energy and the less you hear means the more you use for propulsion" - Ulrich Baretzky


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 15, 2015 7:14 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 7:56 pm
Posts: 1705
Location: Hawaii
minchy wrote:
Steve C wrote:
Blake wrote:
:lol:

steve, you are the one who missed out on the thread, huffing and puffing about others "judging" the president. You are the one who attempted to narrow the scope of the thread. I have read what you wrote and wrote... many of us have... and several of us are more than a little amazed at some of your stances.

We are going in circles now so I think I will get off the merry-go-round


You and Prima are the ones huffing and puffing not I. I never said either of you nor anybody else here can't have an opinion. You read that, I didn't write it.

I'm sure you're amazed, you are liberal.

2 pages ago I asked it you could elaborate on your views and even if I don't agree with them you have done so, so thank you. You have seemed to go on the offensive here against those who don't share your views and huff and puff yourself, but as far as non-American's having a view of the US president I think it is very important. Someone else mentioned before that he is sometimes called the leader of the free world, this is my eyes is incorrect and a patriotic Americanism making out that America is the free world and so is not correct.

He is however an important world leader and whoever holds the seat of president of the United States of America does affect millions of non-american's around the world as America is a world power and a highly influential country. Hell, they took the UK to war with them in Iraq under false pretenses and the UK knowingly followed along.

I don't get this obsession you (and other American's) seem to have over conservative and liberal, especially when even those who are deemed liberal are often more conservative than we deem our own conservatives to be! These things however are more important to you as an American than to non-American's who also have views about the president and see him as an individual sharing his countries views with the rest of the world. To us, what matters is how his administration effects us (and it does) and what America is doing under his leadership to help or hinder the rest of the world.

For me, Obama is a good president. He comes across as a good man and a strong leader who understands America's role in the world and has tried to undo the damage that the Bush's administration did to America's reputation in this part of the world. And yes, whether you like it or not, Bush was almost seen as a joke to most people I know in the UK. I was personally more scared that he would start WWIII than any terrorist group would. Not the American people, but Bush and his administration. And his party really hasn't done much for me in persuading me otherwise since he left office with the likes of McCain, Palin and Romney and the way that congress has been seen to operate during Obama's presidency also makes the whole American political system look like a joke, I mean what government shuts down in protest because they're not happy with their democratically elected leader?

I've got to be honest, I only mentioned McCain, Palin and Romney because most of the recent Republican presidential candidates have all blended into 1 rich white, forcefully Christian, businessman and those 3 are the only ones I actually remember the names of. The problem I have with that is that I shouldn't have to say white or Christian, skin colour and religion don't make a difference to me, but it seems that they do to the American voters that these people were campaigning towards. Why wold skin colour matter in a country founded by immigrates of numerous nationalities and African's whose ancestors were brought over forcefully but now share the same rights as all Americans? And why did a number of them say that they would bring the country back to it's Christian values? Firstly, I didn't know that the country was based on Christian values, more like simply decent values that are shared by most religions, and also both these things are included in the US constitution and it's amendments saying that all religions and people have the same rights (I know that it can and has been interpreted differently, but to the best of knowledge it was written and amended with equality for all in mind). And these people look to me as being very dangerous people to be leaders of such an influential country with an important place in world politics. In my eyes, America made the right decision at the past 2 elections.

And as far as discussing this on a motorsport forum, I think you can agree that it is by and large (especially the off-topic forum) a civilized place to have a discussion, with no personal abuse, no major trolling and more mature discussing of differing opinions than you would find on almost any other online community.



I agree about your views of "Leader of the Free World" and really being an influential leader.

The reason why so much importance is placed on "liberal" or "conservative" is that the US Govt is based on checks and balances. We effectively only have a 2 party system and when one is too powerful it puts things out of whack. Same reason why our Government is set up with the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches. One gets too powerful and things get put out of whack.

The Judicial doesn't really ever overstep. The issue with too much "liberal" or "conservative" is that the 2 of 3 branches can overwhelm the 3 branch. Keep in mind that the US was founded on being able to have a voice in Government and when your Government stops listening to the people then it has failed to work for the people. This is what many don't think about..................Government works for the people, not the other way around.

I do believe Obama is a good person, however he lacks even rudimentary leadership skills as he never ran anything before he became President. His administration is characterized by a complete lack of accountability starting from the Secretary of State's role in the killing of an American Ambassador (I cannot even recall any other US Ambassador being killed), or the Attorney General's role in Operation Gun Runner and assorted other debacles, or lack of accountability for the Secret Service, or the person responsible for setting up the Obamacare gateways online, etc. It just goes on and on.

Now that's bad enough, but when you live in the US you would often hear Obama state that he wasn't aware of things. For the man in charge that is a massive and critical issue. When the National Enquirer breaks stories that the Government doesn't know about or the Departments fail to notify the Commander In Chief..........massive problems. I do not recall, W included, ever hearing any President make those excuses.

With regards to Christian values, yes the US is predominantly Christian and was based on Christian values as the prudes left England to found the Colonies. Those Colonists rebelled against England to found the USA after they felt their voices were not being heard by England. That is the basic premise of our country although the founding fathers did want to allow for further growth it doesn't mean that old values (right or wrong) have changed as most open minded persons feel they should........and while I think it's abhorrent that some people are so closed minded, I have to respect the Constitution that allows them that Right so long as it doesn't hurt someone.

With regards to equal Rights for religions you are not correct in thinking that it can be interpreted differently. The Supreme Court of the United States regularly allows for non-discrimination (you should see the requirements that I have to post on my jobsite posters). This doesn't mean that some hokey peeps wont try to circumvent the system on a local level through their elected officials, but they do get shot down.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 15, 2015 3:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6348
Location: Nebraska, USA
Hawaii,

Something that needs to be mentioned is that All presidents in recent decades have had things that have been called into question... major things, such as Iran-Contra during the Reagan years, Clinton impeachment, W Bush a WAR based on lies losing thousands of American soldiers and over 100,000 Iraqi civilians, men, women and children... based on lies! And that is just a start. That doesn't mean that Obama's errors should be excused or overlooked, just that you KNOW that every administration is going to have their less than glorious moments... even more so these days when partisanship is more vicious than I ever remember seeing. Thanks a lot, Newt....

You mention accountability, Obama is but a beginner in this category, as the administration he followed covered up or hid so very much. Why were we not allowed to know the make up of the Energy Commission headed by Cheney? Hell, he even when to court to prevent us knowing who was on it? WHY? Perhaps because the deck was stacked in favor of big energy such as a certain Enron leader? What about the outing of a CIA agent name because her husband found something that did not support the Weapons of Mass Destruction claims, and Rove went to the wall to prevent an investigation into that. I felt that the $19b no-bid contracted awarded to
Cheney's old company, Halliburton, was quite suspect... as did another company that felt they should have had a chance to bid it, yet, there was on accountability on that action either. As I said, you can make these kind of cases for every president.

Yes, Obama has had his cases as well, as you have justifiably pointed out, but it is certainly nothing new for our government nor unique. Nor is deniability anything new, with one such example from again, Bush's years... The "Mission Accomplished" sign that the administration claimed they were not behind, but later had to admit that they were. And I assure you that was but only one of many such denials, again, the Plame case being paramount in that respect. That it was done before does not make it right, but the idea that Obama has broken new ground, or gone to greater extremes is not right either.

I am in a bit of disbief when I see the National Enquirer in a post when we are talking about credibilty... that is the biggest dirt rag in print. It is a joke in almost every circle, be it Washington or Hollywood. Not knowing what the other department are doing? What about the hurricane Katrina fiasco, while Brown was screwing things up, Bush was praising him "Brownie, you're doing a heckuva job"....a job he was appointed to after being fired by the Arabian Horse Association.

Lastly, about the check and balances within our government. We are largely in agreement. There is one thing that I would comment on. the Judicial branch was never supposed to be part of the "2 party system", was never supposed to be conservatives vs liberal, Republicans vs Democrats. It's sole purpose was to interpret the written rules and make judgement based on them with no party line overriding influence. Obviously, that is a bit of a dream, and probably impossible. However, in recent years it has become a "joke" and the Supreme Court is little more than yet another party "Tool", and personally, I resent it, and many of their recent decisions, in particular those related to party fundraising. Citizens United is a disaster .. but that is fodder for a different thread maybe one day. The only reason I have gone there is to point out that in the Executive and Legislative branches, the parties are a bit of a check and balance when, as you say, one party does not control all aspects. The Judicial (ie Supreme Court) was to be yet another "check and balance" ruling on the legality of actions.

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm... I was going to leave this topic to go where it would go... so much for my self-restraint.
:lol:

I shall try again, Ciao!

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Last edited by Blake on Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 15, 2015 4:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2007 12:59 am
Posts: 790
Hollande, Merkel, Obama, and Anote Tong are the only "foreign" heads of state I can think of off the top of my head, so he obviously hasn't done too badly - performing as well or possibly even better than the president of Kiribati** is nothing to be ashamed of.







** briefly moved my Quizup country of residence to Kiribati. I was the champion of everything until my so-called friends cottoned on.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 15, 2015 6:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 1:40 pm
Posts: 6628
HawaiiF1Fan wrote:
I do believe Obama is a good person, however he lacks even rudimentary leadership skills as he never ran anything before he became President. His administration is characterized by a complete lack of accountability starting from the Secretary of State's role in the killing of an American Ambassador (I cannot even recall any other US Ambassador being killed), or the Attorney General's role in Operation Gun Runner and assorted other debacles, or lack of accountability for the Secret Service, or the person responsible for setting up the Obamacare gateways online, etc. It just goes on and on.


Speaking about the lack of accountability, it has already been mentioned by Blake that practically every Administration in the recent time got something that to be called in question. And he also brought up the examples of the previous Administration. I would just add that, if Obama's administration is to be pointed out as characterized by a complete lack of accountability, then I do not know what expression even to start with to use for the previous administration in that same regard. Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld-Wolfwitz... they will go down to history in that regard, as far as the rest of the world goes, I believe so.

Regarding "he lacks even rudimentary leadership skills as he never ran anything before he became President". Well, he is well in his second term now. He did run the USA before he was re-elected, so to go saying that he lacks the rudimentary leaderships skills now, in his second term... it would not be an accurate description.

I remembered that such was the part of Romney's presidential campaign, to promote how Obama lacked in the executive leadership experience (apparently it did not help Romney that terribly much) but I wonder how long that same, by now old rhetorics, are to be repeated. At one point, such can't hold... the man is starting getting old in the Oval Office.

And speaking about Romney going after Obama's lack of leadership skills:
A new survey that evaluated the leadership skills of President Barack Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney has found that Obama scored significantly better than Romney in most leadership categories and in overall leadership skill.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 102616.htm

And I am sure one could find the polls and alike to support both views. But my point is, Obama's lack of running anything before 2008, that should be a water under the bridge by know.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 17, 2015 7:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 7:56 pm
Posts: 1705
Location: Hawaii
Blake wrote:
Hawaii,

Something that needs to be mentioned is that All presidents in recent decades have had things that have been called into question... major things, such as Iran-Contra during the Reagan years, Clinton impeachment, W Bush a WAR based on lies losing thousands of American soldiers and over 100,000 Iraqi civilians, men, women and children... based on lies! And that is just a start. That doesn't mean that Obama's errors should be excused or overlooked, just that you KNOW that every administration is going to have their less than glorious moments... even more so these days when partisanship is more vicious than I ever remember seeing. Thanks a lot, Newt....

You mention accountability, Obama is but a beginner in this category, as the administration he followed covered up or hid so very much. Why were we not allowed to know the make up of the Energy Commission headed by Cheney? Hell, he even when to court to prevent us knowing who was on it? WHY? Perhaps because the deck was stacked in favor of big energy such as a certain Enron leader? What about the outing of a CIA agent name because her husband found something that did not support the Weapons of Mass Destruction claims, and Rove went to the wall to prevent an investigation into that. I felt that the $19b no-bid contracted awarded to
Cheney's old company, Halliburton, was quite suspect... as did another company that felt they should have had a chance to bid it, yet, there was on accountability on that action either. As I said, you can make these kind of cases for every president.

Yes, Obama has had his cases as well, as you have justifiably pointed out, but it is certainly nothing new for our government nor unique. Nor is deniability anything new, with one such example from again, Bush's years... The "Mission Accomplished" sign that the administration claimed they were not behind, but later had to admit that they were. And I assure you that was but only one of many such denials, again, the Plame case being paramount in that respect. That it was done before does not make it right, but the idea that Obama has broken new ground, or gone to greater extremes is not right either.

I am in a bit of disbief when I see the National Enquirer in a post when we are talking about credibilty... that is the biggest dirt rag in print. It is a joke in almost every circle, be it Washington or Hollywood. Not knowing what the other department are doing? What about the hurricane Katrina fiasco, while Brown was screwing things up, Bush was praising him "Brownie, you're doing a heckuva job"....a job he was appointed to after being fired by the Arabian Horse Association.

Lastly, about the check and balances within our government. We are largely in agreement. There is one thing that I would comment on. the Judicial branch was never supposed to be part of the "2 party system", was never supposed to be conservatives vs liberal, Republicans vs Democrats. It's sole purpose was to interpret the written rules and make judgement based on them with no party line overriding influence. Obviously, that is a bit of a dream, and probably impossible. However, in recent years it has become a "joke" and the Supreme Court is little more than yet another party "Tool", and personally, I resent it, and many of their recent decisions, in particular those related to party fundraising. Citizens United is a disaster .. but that is fodder for a different thread maybe one day. The only reason I have gone there is to point out that in the Executive and Legislative branches, the parties are a bit of a check and balance when, as you say, one party does not control all aspects. The Judicial (ie Supreme Court) was to be yet another "check and balance" ruling on the legality of actions.

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm... I was going to leave this topic to go where it would go... so much for my self-restraint.
:lol:

I shall try again, Ciao!



You do make some good points and I do agree that every President has skeletons in his closet, however when someone bases their platform on change and then does the exact same thing it says either they are complete BS-ers (which I don't think Obama is totally) or that they are just not able to understand the situation they are getting themselves into (which I think is the category that Obama does fall into). There are reasons why he didn't follow up on his multiple campaign promises for transparency in Govt, shutting down Gitmo, withdrawal from Iraq/Afghanistan by certain dates, etc............he just has no idea what was/is going on and when he was finally in a position to understand he did basically the same thing as the guy before him did. This I can forgive and actually agree with.........as a Citizen there are certain things my Govt will do without my knowledge and they are probably pretty heinous, but when it's in protection of Country and Citizens I understand it. I say this because either you get involved or you risk something like WW3 breaking out. You are either an isolationist or you put your $0.02 and let the pieces fall where they may.

What I cannot forgive is how Obama treats the Citizens. From the way Holder is running roughshod over the Country to not taking action against the Sec of State when she basically allowed a US Ambassador to be murdered when all reports from that person indicated that; (1) the Diplomatic Mission should have been withdrawn, or (2) there should have been a significant build up of force to protect that Embassy, or (3) allowing no help to be dispatched to aid that Diplomatic Mission when they reported they were under assault.

I have never said W was great, but he's not as bad as many think and certainly on par with Obama. Both these Presidents went through massive challenges during their terms. They were unfortunately not as successful as they or we Citizens hoped.

I think the same could probably be said about Clinton (being a poor President). Completely missed the boat on the increase of international terrorism. First the wake up call with the first terrorist attack on US soil in 1993 and ending with the attack on the USS Cole. From 1993 to 2000 Clinton could not see the road map of where this was going and unfortunately encouraged later attacks because of a failure to respond to those issues. Those unfortunately faded into the woodwork.

With regards to the National Enquirer, yes there is a reason I put that in there and it's because they broke some stories that the Obama Administration denied knowing. This is exactly why I brought this up. Why the hell does the National Enquirer know about stuff the Administration doesn't and almost as important........how the hell does the media not know? All these serious investigative journalists out there and the Enquirer is breaking stories? Pretty sad, but it goes to point that system is also broken as they are largely mouthpieces for the two large political parties.

I agree about the Campaign spending thing too. I think candidates should be forced to shove their money in a pool for distribution. That'll take out some of the bias and ability to buy seats.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 17, 2015 7:08 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 7:56 pm
Posts: 1705
Location: Hawaii
Blake wrote:
Hawaii,

.....................hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm... I was going to leave this topic to go where it would go... so much for my self-restraint.
:lol:

I shall try again, Ciao!



[poke] [poke] [poke] ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group