Aa
10 questions for Obama to answer
Washington (CNN) -- Mitt Romney has had a bad couple of weeks, really a bad month since the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Florida. The media spotlight has relentlessly focused on him. But there is an incumbent in the race, too, and an incumbent with a record that also reveals important disappointments, errors and failures.
Over the next month, President Barack Obama will stand on stage beside Romney and submit to press questioning before millions of TV viewers. Here are 10 questions I'd like to hear him answer:
1) More than 50 U.S. and coalition soldiers have been killed so far this year by supposedly friendly Afghan forces. Two Americans were fatally shot just last week by Afghans we trained and equipped. These so-called "green on blue" attacks now account for 14% of all coalition casualties.
In 2009, you ordered 33,000 additional U.S. forces into Afghanistan. Three years later, Afghanistan looks no more stable than it did in 2009. Can you tell us specifically what the Afghan surge accomplished?
2) Campaigning in 2008, you called for tearing down the walls that separated the Muslim world from the West. You granted your first post-inauguration interview to Al Arabiyya television and told the interviewer: "My job to the Muslim world is to communicate that the Americans are not your enemy." You traveled to Cairo, Egypt, in 2009 to deliver a speech offering "a new beginning" in U.S. relations with the Islamic world.
With the discovery that our ally Pakistan was home to Osama bin Laden, with a 9/11 denialist now elected president of Egypt, with our embassies under attack, with the news only in this past week that an Egyptian schoolteacher was sentenced to six years in prison for postings judged offensive to Islam on his Facebook page and mobs in Bangladesh burning Buddhist temples -- why have your hopes for change been so brutally disappointed?
3) After the lethal attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, U.S. intelligence agencies collected information that the attacks were premeditated and coordinated by elements of al Qaeda in Libya, and timed to the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. Yet your administration insisted for more than a week that the attacks were a spontaneous reaction to a YouTube video. Susan Rice, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, was sent to five Sunday morning shows to repeat a claim that she -- and you -- had to have known was untrue. The video maker is now under arrest, ostensibly because of parole violations, but pretty obviously for exercising his free-speech rights. Why didn't you just tell the truth to the American people from the start?
4) Can you today guarantee that Iran will not have acquired a nuclear weapon by the time you finish a second term in office?
5) You inherited the worst economic crash since the 1930s. The economy hit bottom in the summer of 2009 and a recovery then began. Congratulations. Yet this recovery has been the slowest and weakest since World War II. Nobody blames you for the collapse. But why shouldn't Americans blame you for the meager record since recovery began more than three years ago?
6) You propose to allow the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 to expire on income above $250,000. That would raise the top rate of federal income tax back to 39.6%. When the Affordable Care Act is fully implemented, the top rate will rise past 40%, including the new health care surtax. Almost all states collect income taxes of their own, rising nearly to 10% in California and even beyond in Oregon. Do you believe there a percentage level at which the government is taking just too much? What is it?
7) You emphasize more college education as the most important way to raise worker wages. Yet even before the Great Recession began, wages were actually dropping for new college graduates. As technology enables the outsourcing of white-collar jobs, too, it's ceasing to be true that a college degree in itself translates into a rising standard of living. Got any other ideas?
8) You've expressed concern about growing wealth disparities in America. One cause of those disparities is the huge surge of low-wage immigration since 1970: almost 30 million newcomers. These newcomers are three times as likely as the native-born to lack a high-school diploma. Even before the Great Recession, they were 50% more likely to be poor than the native-born. The best data show that even the great-grandchildren of low-skill Latino immigrants continue to struggle in the high-tech economy. Your immigration proposals call for granting illegal immigrants a path to citizenship, creating incentives for more illegal entry in the future and continuing family reunification policies that will maintain our present low-skill immigration intake for years and decades to come. How do you reconcile your immigration proposals with your promise to strengthen the American middle class?
9) Your administration reacted to the financial crisis with an $800 billion fiscal stimulus. You promised that it would create jobs and rebuild American infrastructure. Yet Amtrak's latest plan for the Northeast rail corridor can promise no shortening of travel times until the 2040s. Can you give examples of any real-life improvements to our infrastructure that were achieved by your stimulus? Please be as specific as possible.
10) If you're re-elected in 2012, what hope is there that the next four years will be less acrimonious and ineffectual than the past two? Can you acknowledge any fault at all on your own side for the paralysis in Washington -- and what will you change to try to make your second term less rancorous than your first?
SOURCE: http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/01/opinion/frum-10-questions-for-obama/index.html?hpt=po_c2
Over the next month, President Barack Obama will stand on stage beside Romney and submit to press questioning before millions of TV viewers. Here are 10 questions I'd like to hear him answer:
1) More than 50 U.S. and coalition soldiers have been killed so far this year by supposedly friendly Afghan forces. Two Americans were fatally shot just last week by Afghans we trained and equipped. These so-called "green on blue" attacks now account for 14% of all coalition casualties.
In 2009, you ordered 33,000 additional U.S. forces into Afghanistan. Three years later, Afghanistan looks no more stable than it did in 2009. Can you tell us specifically what the Afghan surge accomplished?
2) Campaigning in 2008, you called for tearing down the walls that separated the Muslim world from the West. You granted your first post-inauguration interview to Al Arabiyya television and told the interviewer: "My job to the Muslim world is to communicate that the Americans are not your enemy." You traveled to Cairo, Egypt, in 2009 to deliver a speech offering "a new beginning" in U.S. relations with the Islamic world.
With the discovery that our ally Pakistan was home to Osama bin Laden, with a 9/11 denialist now elected president of Egypt, with our embassies under attack, with the news only in this past week that an Egyptian schoolteacher was sentenced to six years in prison for postings judged offensive to Islam on his Facebook page and mobs in Bangladesh burning Buddhist temples -- why have your hopes for change been so brutally disappointed?
3) After the lethal attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, U.S. intelligence agencies collected information that the attacks were premeditated and coordinated by elements of al Qaeda in Libya, and timed to the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. Yet your administration insisted for more than a week that the attacks were a spontaneous reaction to a YouTube video. Susan Rice, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, was sent to five Sunday morning shows to repeat a claim that she -- and you -- had to have known was untrue. The video maker is now under arrest, ostensibly because of parole violations, but pretty obviously for exercising his free-speech rights. Why didn't you just tell the truth to the American people from the start?
4) Can you today guarantee that Iran will not have acquired a nuclear weapon by the time you finish a second term in office?
5) You inherited the worst economic crash since the 1930s. The economy hit bottom in the summer of 2009 and a recovery then began. Congratulations. Yet this recovery has been the slowest and weakest since World War II. Nobody blames you for the collapse. But why shouldn't Americans blame you for the meager record since recovery began more than three years ago?
6) You propose to allow the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 to expire on income above $250,000. That would raise the top rate of federal income tax back to 39.6%. When the Affordable Care Act is fully implemented, the top rate will rise past 40%, including the new health care surtax. Almost all states collect income taxes of their own, rising nearly to 10% in California and even beyond in Oregon. Do you believe there a percentage level at which the government is taking just too much? What is it?
7) You emphasize more college education as the most important way to raise worker wages. Yet even before the Great Recession began, wages were actually dropping for new college graduates. As technology enables the outsourcing of white-collar jobs, too, it's ceasing to be true that a college degree in itself translates into a rising standard of living. Got any other ideas?
8) You've expressed concern about growing wealth disparities in America. One cause of those disparities is the huge surge of low-wage immigration since 1970: almost 30 million newcomers. These newcomers are three times as likely as the native-born to lack a high-school diploma. Even before the Great Recession, they were 50% more likely to be poor than the native-born. The best data show that even the great-grandchildren of low-skill Latino immigrants continue to struggle in the high-tech economy. Your immigration proposals call for granting illegal immigrants a path to citizenship, creating incentives for more illegal entry in the future and continuing family reunification policies that will maintain our present low-skill immigration intake for years and decades to come. How do you reconcile your immigration proposals with your promise to strengthen the American middle class?
9) Your administration reacted to the financial crisis with an $800 billion fiscal stimulus. You promised that it would create jobs and rebuild American infrastructure. Yet Amtrak's latest plan for the Northeast rail corridor can promise no shortening of travel times until the 2040s. Can you give examples of any real-life improvements to our infrastructure that were achieved by your stimulus? Please be as specific as possible.
10) If you're re-elected in 2012, what hope is there that the next four years will be less acrimonious and ineffectual than the past two? Can you acknowledge any fault at all on your own side for the paralysis in Washington -- and what will you change to try to make your second term less rancorous than your first?
SOURCE: http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/01/opinion/frum-10-questions-for-obama/index.html?hpt=po_c2
Apologies.
Had some b/s going on at work yesterday, and took it out on you.
I still think you're wrong about the fact that we shouldn't have gone into Afghanistan, but it's your opinion, right-wrong-or indifferent, so I guess it's just something we'll have to disagree on.
My question still stands though: how would you have had us (Bush) respond to the 9/11 attacks?
I don't agree with war, nor am I a war-monger, but the bible tells us... "an eye for an eye", and I think our response to OBL's atrocities was more than adequate. Someone brings a knife to a fight, you return the favor with a GUN. Someone brings a gun, you brink a BIGGER gun.
You said: we didn't need a war to kill OBL. Well, the country NEEDED a knee-jerk reaction to what happened on 9/11, and that's exactly what Bush did.
EVERYONE wanted payback for what happened on 9/11, at the time of the attacks... everyone.
You may say NOW, that going to war wasn't the appropriate response, but I'll promise you that AT THE TIME of the attacks on 9/11, you felt differently (be honest, and think back to how you felt).
Again, apologies for my rude comment. Shouldn't have taken out MY work stress on YOU!
Had some b/s going on at work yesterday, and took it out on you.
I still think you're wrong about the fact that we shouldn't have gone into Afghanistan, but it's your opinion, right-wrong-or indifferent, so I guess it's just something we'll have to disagree on.
My question still stands though: how would you have had us (Bush) respond to the 9/11 attacks?
I don't agree with war, nor am I a war-monger, but the bible tells us... "an eye for an eye", and I think our response to OBL's atrocities was more than adequate. Someone brings a knife to a fight, you return the favor with a GUN. Someone brings a gun, you brink a BIGGER gun.
You said: we didn't need a war to kill OBL. Well, the country NEEDED a knee-jerk reaction to what happened on 9/11, and that's exactly what Bush did.
EVERYONE wanted payback for what happened on 9/11, at the time of the attacks... everyone.
You may say NOW, that going to war wasn't the appropriate response, but I'll promise you that AT THE TIME of the attacks on 9/11, you felt differently (be honest, and think back to how you felt).
Again, apologies for my rude comment. Shouldn't have taken out MY work stress on YOU!
I guess in retrospect, I should have said something about what was written to you as it wasn't nice but it is hard to know who are friends here and if it is just joking around with one another. You are, in my opinion, polite to everyone. You deserve to be treated the same way.
"Do you even THINK prior to typing?"
Shame on you.
You might take your own advice, sonny.
Shame on you.
You might take your own advice, sonny.
While I didn't sigh or make any noises at all, I didn't totally agree with you either. I think there were some reasons to feel threatened by what was going on in Afghanistan. But, we killed him and it is over. What there probably IS on this board is a collective agreement that the time has come to bring our troops home.
Xo!
"I think the entire board sighed a collective "Uhhhhhhhg" when they read that."
Not everyone! For sure Vance, probably Brice, Barb specialmom and maybe R .HOWEVER, the rest of the crew will hopefully not be sighing at me..lol
"You're saying that Afghanistan & the Taliban posed no threat to the United States?
Never said that at all. I said Iraq was not a threat to us. By going into Iraq we gave the taliban complete control to do damage....We could have secured both countries in a smarter and more calculated way..
"Anyone that makes a statement like that... seriously MrsP. Do you even THINK prior to typing?"
You know El, it's funny when I make opinions and state facts you always spin it and TRY to make me look like a fool but my friend you will never succeed. There's no need for that. I thought we were cool. No need for insults. It is SO hard for you to even consider something other than what YOU feel is right....I'm not the smartest person in the world but I can keep up with the best of them so you can.......
"I can't talk to you. It's pointless."
Why do you bother then?
Not everyone! For sure Vance, probably Brice, Barb specialmom and maybe R .HOWEVER, the rest of the crew will hopefully not be sighing at me..lol
"You're saying that Afghanistan & the Taliban posed no threat to the United States?
Never said that at all. I said Iraq was not a threat to us. By going into Iraq we gave the taliban complete control to do damage....We could have secured both countries in a smarter and more calculated way..
"Anyone that makes a statement like that... seriously MrsP. Do you even THINK prior to typing?"
You know El, it's funny when I make opinions and state facts you always spin it and TRY to make me look like a fool but my friend you will never succeed. There's no need for that. I thought we were cool. No need for insults. It is SO hard for you to even consider something other than what YOU feel is right....I'm not the smartest person in the world but I can keep up with the best of them so you can.......
"I can't talk to you. It's pointless."
Why do you bother then?
Just personal opinion..
I'll never understand the Iraq' war. Still doesn't make sense to me. I do think Afghanistan was necessary and just. Just my opinion.
I'll never understand the Iraq' war. Still doesn't make sense to me. I do think Afghanistan was necessary and just. Just my opinion.
Germany didn't attack us yet we waged a war in Europe, we could have just fought Japan but we didn't. Just killing Bin Laden in 2001 would have done nothing other then a symbol. The money was funded by others, the actual plan was figured out by others. Bin Laden was really no more then a figure head to the organization in 2001.
As for Iraq it's pointless talking about it because if someone is/was against it, nothing said will change that persons mind.
As for Iraq it's pointless talking about it because if someone is/was against it, nothing said will change that persons mind.
I agree, its time to bring em home.
I would be happy to not be at war. End it already. Bin Laden is dead now. Let's go home. Is the fear that the Taliban will harbor the next Bin Laden? Well, that is always the fear but that evil individual could come out of anywhere.
I'm ready to end this war. I can't lie. Is Obama? I can't remember.
I'm ready to end this war. I can't lie. Is Obama? I can't remember.
Oh how condescending of you el. MrsPincince simply pointed out that in her opinion there might have been a better way. How is that tied to no posed threats?
And frankly we went into Iraq because of a misguided intelligence that said they had WMD, and we found none, but look how many people lost their lives?
The point remains however that if you want to talk deficit, one must remember that these two wars, medicaid part d and the bush tax cuts are on it. Add to that the money that had to be spent to dig out of a very deep hole and well..... you get my point.
And frankly we went into Iraq because of a misguided intelligence that said they had WMD, and we found none, but look how many people lost their lives?
The point remains however that if you want to talk deficit, one must remember that these two wars, medicaid part d and the bush tax cuts are on it. Add to that the money that had to be spent to dig out of a very deep hole and well..... you get my point.
"...Also, Sure as hell NOT go to war with a country that posed NO threat to us...Duh!..."
I can't talk to you. It's pointless.
Anyone that makes a statement like that... seriously MrsP. Do you even THINK prior to typing?
I think the entire board sighed a collective "Uhhhhhhhg" when they read that.
You're saying that Afghanistan & the Taliban posed no threat to the United States?
I can't talk to you. It's pointless.
Anyone that makes a statement like that... seriously MrsP. Do you even THINK prior to typing?
I think the entire board sighed a collective "Uhhhhhhhg" when they read that.
You're saying that Afghanistan & the Taliban posed no threat to the United States?
I'm asking you. You use the term frequently. I am going back, trying to look into all of the cracks and crevices looking for the bank account that wars are funded through.... can find it.
Seeing that it has been the republicans claiming it must be paid for up front. Ask them?
Can I please have the definition of a funded war?
Cost of War in Iraq & Afghanistan
$1,378,753,091,645
Number Of Iraqis Slaughtered In US War And Occupation Of Iraq "1,455,590"
Number of U.S. Military Personnel Sacrificed (Officially acknowledged) In U.S. War And Occupation Of Iraq 4,801
Number Of International Occupation Force Troops Slaughtered In Afghanistan : 3,195
Current price of war and growing daily.
$1,378,753,091,645
Number Of Iraqis Slaughtered In US War And Occupation Of Iraq "1,455,590"
Number of U.S. Military Personnel Sacrificed (Officially acknowledged) In U.S. War And Occupation Of Iraq 4,801
Number Of International Occupation Force Troops Slaughtered In Afghanistan : 3,195
Current price of war and growing daily.
Brice,
we could go back and forth all day. I don't know about you but to me its beating a dead horse that you nor I will concede. I respect that! besides, I really don't feel like it so I'm just going to say we'll have to agree to disagree my dear friend:) But I do respect your opinions and views even if they differ from mine.
EL,
"What do YOU think we should have done, in response to the 9/11 attacks? "
I'm not claiming to know it all or be a foreign policy expert however, I personally feel the Bush Administration could have found a different alternative than 2 COSTLY UNNECESSARY WARS that put us in a deficit to begin with.
Also, Sure as hell NOT go to war with a country that posed NO threat to us...Duh!
"We ended up in Afghanistan because of the horrific events of 9/11... or have you forgotten about that?"
There could've been a better strategy instead of WAR! Obviously we didn't need the war to Kill Bin Laden.
"I'm not certain why the war in Afghanistan keeps coming up (from the Democrat view point) as a BAD thing."
Because WAR is NOT a good thing....It costs us A $hit load of money, and most importantly, We loose too many of our men and women who should've been focusing on what their career would've been. But Instead had to face two unnecessary and costly wars to protect their fellow Americans and their country.....I'm just saying, there could've have been a different approach to bringing those to justice that attacked us on 9/11 than going to war.
we could go back and forth all day. I don't know about you but to me its beating a dead horse that you nor I will concede. I respect that! besides, I really don't feel like it so I'm just going to say we'll have to agree to disagree my dear friend:) But I do respect your opinions and views even if they differ from mine.
EL,
"What do YOU think we should have done, in response to the 9/11 attacks? "
I'm not claiming to know it all or be a foreign policy expert however, I personally feel the Bush Administration could have found a different alternative than 2 COSTLY UNNECESSARY WARS that put us in a deficit to begin with.
Also, Sure as hell NOT go to war with a country that posed NO threat to us...Duh!
"We ended up in Afghanistan because of the horrific events of 9/11... or have you forgotten about that?"
There could've been a better strategy instead of WAR! Obviously we didn't need the war to Kill Bin Laden.
"I'm not certain why the war in Afghanistan keeps coming up (from the Democrat view point) as a BAD thing."
Because WAR is NOT a good thing....It costs us A $hit load of money, and most importantly, We loose too many of our men and women who should've been focusing on what their career would've been. But Instead had to face two unnecessary and costly wars to protect their fellow Americans and their country.....I'm just saying, there could've have been a different approach to bringing those to justice that attacked us on 9/11 than going to war.
My point is:
Deficit Hypocrites
Before considering what exactly is wrong with the conservative critique of deficits, it is first useful to see just how hypocritical many of them are about this topic. In reality, most conservative politicians don’t care nearly as much about deficits as they claim. Consider the evidence: most Republicans in Congress did not become deficit hawks until after President Obama was elected. During the previous administration they were busy helping President Bush turn the budget surpluses of the Clinton era into large deficits. Most conservatives did not see this rapid increase in the national debt as a problem at all. Vice-President Cheney blithely dismissed those issues at the time by saying, “Reagan proved deficits don’t matter.”
So clearly many Republicans think deficits are just fine when they are spending the public’s money on their own political priorities. It didn’t bother them to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan by massive deficit spending. And they were all too glad to add hundreds of billions to the national debt by passing several enormous tax cuts – money that went largely to the wealthy. The Center for Budget and Policy Priorities has estimated that those wars and tax cuts will eventually contribute a whopping $7 trillion to federal deficits by 2019.1
Many Republicans know – or should know – that almost all the projected deficits in the coming years have nothing to do with “out of control and irresponsible spending” by the Obama administration. Consider, for example, the projected deficit for 2013 of $962 billion. A study has shown that 42% ($402 billion) of that deficit will be due to the Bush-era tax cuts. Costs of the Bush initiated wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will account for 16% ($153 billion). Another 41% ($395 billion) of the deficit will be caused by the economic downturn that began in 2008.2 This last figure includes lost tax revenues, money for the bailout that was necessary to prevent a complete economic meltdown, and money for an economic stimulus package to speed economic recovery. All these factors together will amount to 99% of the deficit in 2013! But this reality is being ignored by Republican politicians who continue to erroneously claim that Democrats and their policies are the main cause of our deficit problems.
Further evidence of Republican hypocrisy about deficits can be found in the way they ignore obvious ways of addressing this problem. If they really cared about reducing deficits, they would be enthusiastic about letting the Bush tax cuts expire. This would be the single most immediate and effective way to help rein in deficit spending. But instead, in 2010 they refused to extend unemployment benefits to millions of Americans until the Democrats agreed to extend all of these tax cuts – thus adding hundreds of billions to the national debt. Apparently, preserving low taxes, especially for the rich, is the real number one priority for Republicans, not cutting the deficits.
As their behavior indicates, many Republicans are not in principle against deficits, only deficit spending they don’t agree with. It is only when the Democrats want to spend money on things like making health care more accessible, improving education, or extending unemployment benefits that suddenly deficits matter and we are “broke” and “can’t afford” these “irresponsible” expenditures.
http://www.governmentisgood.com/articles.php?aid=30
Deficit Hypocrites
Before considering what exactly is wrong with the conservative critique of deficits, it is first useful to see just how hypocritical many of them are about this topic. In reality, most conservative politicians don’t care nearly as much about deficits as they claim. Consider the evidence: most Republicans in Congress did not become deficit hawks until after President Obama was elected. During the previous administration they were busy helping President Bush turn the budget surpluses of the Clinton era into large deficits. Most conservatives did not see this rapid increase in the national debt as a problem at all. Vice-President Cheney blithely dismissed those issues at the time by saying, “Reagan proved deficits don’t matter.”
So clearly many Republicans think deficits are just fine when they are spending the public’s money on their own political priorities. It didn’t bother them to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan by massive deficit spending. And they were all too glad to add hundreds of billions to the national debt by passing several enormous tax cuts – money that went largely to the wealthy. The Center for Budget and Policy Priorities has estimated that those wars and tax cuts will eventually contribute a whopping $7 trillion to federal deficits by 2019.1
Many Republicans know – or should know – that almost all the projected deficits in the coming years have nothing to do with “out of control and irresponsible spending” by the Obama administration. Consider, for example, the projected deficit for 2013 of $962 billion. A study has shown that 42% ($402 billion) of that deficit will be due to the Bush-era tax cuts. Costs of the Bush initiated wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will account for 16% ($153 billion). Another 41% ($395 billion) of the deficit will be caused by the economic downturn that began in 2008.2 This last figure includes lost tax revenues, money for the bailout that was necessary to prevent a complete economic meltdown, and money for an economic stimulus package to speed economic recovery. All these factors together will amount to 99% of the deficit in 2013! But this reality is being ignored by Republican politicians who continue to erroneously claim that Democrats and their policies are the main cause of our deficit problems.
Further evidence of Republican hypocrisy about deficits can be found in the way they ignore obvious ways of addressing this problem. If they really cared about reducing deficits, they would be enthusiastic about letting the Bush tax cuts expire. This would be the single most immediate and effective way to help rein in deficit spending. But instead, in 2010 they refused to extend unemployment benefits to millions of Americans until the Democrats agreed to extend all of these tax cuts – thus adding hundreds of billions to the national debt. Apparently, preserving low taxes, especially for the rich, is the real number one priority for Republicans, not cutting the deficits.
As their behavior indicates, many Republicans are not in principle against deficits, only deficit spending they don’t agree with. It is only when the Democrats want to spend money on things like making health care more accessible, improving education, or extending unemployment benefits that suddenly deficits matter and we are “broke” and “can’t afford” these “irresponsible” expenditures.
http://www.governmentisgood.com/articles.php?aid=30
"BTW let's remember how we ended up in Afghanistan again???"
We ended up in Afghanistan because of the horrific events of 9/11... or have you forgotten about that?
The Taliban attacked us, on our home turf, so we went over for some pay-back, and also to take out the Taliban and OBL.
I'm not certain why the war in Afghanistan keeps coming up (from the Democrat view point) as a BAD thing.
What do YOU think we should have done, in response to the 9/11 attacks?
We ended up in Afghanistan because of the horrific events of 9/11... or have you forgotten about that?
The Taliban attacked us, on our home turf, so we went over for some pay-back, and also to take out the Taliban and OBL.
I'm not certain why the war in Afghanistan keeps coming up (from the Democrat view point) as a BAD thing.
What do YOU think we should have done, in response to the 9/11 attacks?
If my memory serves me right GITMO did not get closed due to republican obstruction, How many years have we been at war now? Obama got our people out of Iraq and is working on getting them out of Aphganistan, altho republicans dont want to do that and if they have their way we will be in war with someone by years end. I think the American people are sick of war. I say bring all our troops home. 2 unfunded wars and medicare part D along with the bush tax cuts went on the deficit (not paid for).
I was listening to Pelosi on CNN awhile ago and she said it was a Thursday night when things seemed to be getting desperate and said they got together and agreed on bi partisan support to do something now or the economy would have been history by Monday. The hole was deep, very very deep and although we are growing at a snails place, by god we are growing, going in the right direction and I for one don't plan on going back to the same policies that put us here.
I was listening to Pelosi on CNN awhile ago and she said it was a Thursday night when things seemed to be getting desperate and said they got together and agreed on bi partisan support to do something now or the economy would have been history by Monday. The hole was deep, very very deep and although we are growing at a snails place, by god we are growing, going in the right direction and I for one don't plan on going back to the same policies that put us here.
Okay, I guess I'll start from the bottom up. "How can I want hope and change?" Everyone can have hope and change. Hope and change in every day life has nothing to do with a particular candidate. With that said, the mans mantra was "Hope and Change" and he promised to bring it. It was one of a couple points that I thought (dreamed, actually) that the man could address. He didn't..... I didn't vote for the man. My wife did, but guess what? Popular votes mean squat.... the electoral college votes went to the republican candidate so my wife's vote, essentially.... didn't count.
I totally understand that "closing GITMO" isn't so easy to do... now Obama understands that too. He is the guy who said he'd do it, not me.
End the wars.... were still in one. Period. It didnt happen yet so it is at best a "yet to be determined". Still a lot of time for another war with things going the way they are.... I guess that one (if it happens) will be "funded".
Auto industry.... it is NOT determined that he saved it! He threw money at it. If you'll remember, the auto industry has been in financial straights before. We threw money at it, they went about business as usual, and they ended up back as square one. He funded it... not saved it. If he wanted to save it, he would need to address the way they do business and MAKE THEM STICK TO A DIFFERENT BUSINESS MODEL than the one they've operated on for decades.
He did have some priorities... some he got to and some, not too much. Economy is what it is and unemployment??? Things are so good there that people quit looking for work.
Look... don't take it personally Mrs.P. You can't change it... he can't change it. What I am getting around to is this.... politicians need to quit making promises that they cannot keep. They need to remember that there are too many other minds involved to assume they can take care of all of the issues they bragged about. Every politician does it.....
It doesn't matter to me what they mans race is, his party affiliation means squat. If a republican was in office and he said he'd accomplish certain things and didn't??? I hold his feet to the fire too. Accountability..... If my mom was President and said she'd solve x,y, and z and came up short, I'd let her know just that.... you didn't get it done after you swore you would. I've held Bush accountable for his debacle. And especially the last 2 years, I don't know how else you could describe it. Bush turned out to be the biggest spender of all times, till this President. Bush's spending spree sux.... it's still sucking today!!!
Maybe that's just me. After looking at the whole scenario, I'll probably vote for the guy this time. (I know what I am going to get.) That won't matter in the whole spectrum of things because the electoral college votes are Romney's. You're trying to protect something that doesn't need protecting and you're trying to defend something that needs no defense. This is what it is.... No excuses are necessary. No defense is necessary.
The man said it himself..." the buck stops with me".
I totally understand that "closing GITMO" isn't so easy to do... now Obama understands that too. He is the guy who said he'd do it, not me.
End the wars.... were still in one. Period. It didnt happen yet so it is at best a "yet to be determined". Still a lot of time for another war with things going the way they are.... I guess that one (if it happens) will be "funded".
Auto industry.... it is NOT determined that he saved it! He threw money at it. If you'll remember, the auto industry has been in financial straights before. We threw money at it, they went about business as usual, and they ended up back as square one. He funded it... not saved it. If he wanted to save it, he would need to address the way they do business and MAKE THEM STICK TO A DIFFERENT BUSINESS MODEL than the one they've operated on for decades.
He did have some priorities... some he got to and some, not too much. Economy is what it is and unemployment??? Things are so good there that people quit looking for work.
Look... don't take it personally Mrs.P. You can't change it... he can't change it. What I am getting around to is this.... politicians need to quit making promises that they cannot keep. They need to remember that there are too many other minds involved to assume they can take care of all of the issues they bragged about. Every politician does it.....
It doesn't matter to me what they mans race is, his party affiliation means squat. If a republican was in office and he said he'd accomplish certain things and didn't??? I hold his feet to the fire too. Accountability..... If my mom was President and said she'd solve x,y, and z and came up short, I'd let her know just that.... you didn't get it done after you swore you would. I've held Bush accountable for his debacle. And especially the last 2 years, I don't know how else you could describe it. Bush turned out to be the biggest spender of all times, till this President. Bush's spending spree sux.... it's still sucking today!!!
Maybe that's just me. After looking at the whole scenario, I'll probably vote for the guy this time. (I know what I am going to get.) That won't matter in the whole spectrum of things because the electoral college votes are Romney's. You're trying to protect something that doesn't need protecting and you're trying to defend something that needs no defense. This is what it is.... No excuses are necessary. No defense is necessary.
The man said it himself..." the buck stops with me".
So you were on the dole for 6 years. WOW - 47% right here.
No we will not be out of Afghanstain by the end of the year. Violence is still too high and the country still has no real fighting force to beat back the Taliban.
Auto industry was not going to shut down, they were going to have to file bankruptsy protection and would have continued to operate, like the airlines do.
Your statement about not wanting to do jobs is wrong. I was unemployed about 6 years ago. I applied for jobs that I was under qualified for and jobs I was over qualified for. I got more consideration for jobs I was under qualified for because I was told that I would not stay because I was over qualified. I would have taken the job, any job but they would not hire me.
Major priorities should have been working and getting the deficit cut, unemployment down and the economy going, not OBAMA care.
Auto industry was not going to shut down, they were going to have to file bankruptsy protection and would have continued to operate, like the airlines do.
Your statement about not wanting to do jobs is wrong. I was unemployed about 6 years ago. I applied for jobs that I was under qualified for and jobs I was over qualified for. I got more consideration for jobs I was under qualified for because I was told that I would not stay because I was over qualified. I would have taken the job, any job but they would not hire me.
Major priorities should have been working and getting the deficit cut, unemployment down and the economy going, not OBAMA care.
"ended the senseless and money pit wars".... Aren't we still in Afghanistan?
The last opf the troops will be out before the end of the year. BTW let's remember how we ended up in Afghanistan again???
"saved an American built auto industry and saved jobs within that industry" It too is yet to be determined.
It is determined. People didn't lose their jobs and the auto industry has bounced back and paid back their debt.
"He extended unemployment benefits. Okay... he extended a lot of people still being unemployed."
I have to say most Americans are unemployed because they don't want to do jobs that are out there. I know if I lost my job I would take anything that is available ESPECIALLY if I have no income coming in. Minimum wage is better than 0...IMO
I'm not picking on the guy. These are facts. GITMO open, still at war in Afghanistan.... It's okay to say that he didn't get some of his promises taken care of. It really is okay.
The above 2 are not as simple as just "getting it done!" Obviously if they were, it would be done!
"I'm not saying he is a failure.... I am saying he failed to follow through on some promises that I honestly thought he'd handle.... it didn't happen."
Ok he didn't but he ad MAJOR PRIORITIES that personally, I am glad he followed through on.
"Sorry... I wanted hope and change and I didn't get what I was promised. It's not that big of a deal."
How could you want hope and change? I thought you didn't vote for him?
The last opf the troops will be out before the end of the year. BTW let's remember how we ended up in Afghanistan again???
"saved an American built auto industry and saved jobs within that industry" It too is yet to be determined.
It is determined. People didn't lose their jobs and the auto industry has bounced back and paid back their debt.
"He extended unemployment benefits. Okay... he extended a lot of people still being unemployed."
I have to say most Americans are unemployed because they don't want to do jobs that are out there. I know if I lost my job I would take anything that is available ESPECIALLY if I have no income coming in. Minimum wage is better than 0...IMO
I'm not picking on the guy. These are facts. GITMO open, still at war in Afghanistan.... It's okay to say that he didn't get some of his promises taken care of. It really is okay.
The above 2 are not as simple as just "getting it done!" Obviously if they were, it would be done!
"I'm not saying he is a failure.... I am saying he failed to follow through on some promises that I honestly thought he'd handle.... it didn't happen."
Ok he didn't but he ad MAJOR PRIORITIES that personally, I am glad he followed through on.
"Sorry... I wanted hope and change and I didn't get what I was promised. It's not that big of a deal."
How could you want hope and change? I thought you didn't vote for him?
You must join this user group in order to participate in this discussion.
You are reading content posted in the Current Events . . . Group
A list of national and international resources and hotlines to help connect you to needed health and medical services.
Herpes sores blister, then burst, scab and heal.
Herpes spreads by oral, vaginal and anal sex.
STIs are the most common cause of genital sores.
Condoms are the most effective way to prevent HIV and STDs.
PrEP is used by people with high risk to prevent HIV infection.
