The Cellar - The Obamanation

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)

- Politics (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=5)

- - The Obamanation (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=19310)

I knew sooner or later he would say something that wasn't completely obtuse.

Quote:

Originally Posted by classicman (Post 595180)

IS this something new? Were there changes in the laws? Did Obama or the house suddenly allow people to carry guns to Presidential events? ... whats that? no? Oh, then shut up.

As far as I know, it IS something new. Just because there isn't a law against it doesn't make it less disturbing. Considering the range of modern handguns, having them that close is tempting fate.

I agree with Sugarpop that during the last administration there were crackdowns on protesters based on the signs/t-shirts they had with them. Why do we feel safe to put time and place restrictions on the First Amendment and have none on the Second Amendment? I we can have 'free speech' zones miles away from events, why can't we have 'open carry' zones out of gunshot? Noone ever got killed by being yelled at, but we've 3 attempts on presidents since Kennedy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by capnhowdy (Post 595783)

I knew sooner or later he would say something that wasn't completely obtuse.

Well, he also said Kanye West is a jackass. :lol2: I thought that was GREAT!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_286623.html

Oh yeah.... I forgot about that one.

I like it that he's willing to criticize his supporters when they deserve it. I'm looking at the Republicans kissing Beck's and Limbaugh's asses when they step over the line. Kissing? It's more like licking.

It's funny that the coverage has moved to Beck since Limbaugh is not extreme enough anymore. If the progression moves any farther forward, the eventual GOP spokesperson will be covered in shit and speaking in tongues.

Quote:

Originally Posted by richlevy (Post 595788)

I agree with Sugarpop that during the last administration there were crackdowns on protesters based on the signs/t-shirts they had with them. Why do we feel safe to put time and place restrictions on the First Amendment and have none on the Second Amendment? I we can have 'free speech' zones miles away from events, why can't we have 'open carry' zones out of gunshot? Noone ever got killed by being yelled at, but we've 3 attempts on presidents since Kennedy.

Boy and those attempts were by who? The radical right? :headshake

Quote:

Originally Posted by richlevy (Post 595801)

I'm looking at the Republicans kissing Beck's and Limbaugh's asses when they step over the line.

It's funny that the coverage has moved to Beck since Limbaugh is not extreme enough anymore. .

Thats only the extreme right and that is certainly not most R's.

The coverage is what the mainstream media wants you to believe. I didn't realize you were that gullible.

Quote:

Originally Posted by classicman (Post 595820)

Thats only the extreme right and that is certainly not most R's.

The coverage is what the mainstream media wants you to believe. I didn't realize you were that gullible.

Its how all the Republicans I know are. They're still dangerous and have influence, you can't dismiss them because "its only the extreme right." Because either it isn't, or they have a disproportional amount of pull.

Anti-Americanism: Alive and Well in the Age of Obama

Islamic countries distrust the United States under the leadership of President Obama about as much as they did under President George W. Bush. What's going on?

http://www.american.com/archive/2009...e-age-of-obama

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 595833)

Uh OH...a poll?

I posted the same Pew study elsewhere.

The image of the US as a whole has not changed much (marginally more favorable) in Muslim countries in the last year. Perhaps the lack of change in the US favorability ratings as a whole (as opposed to the ratings of the president) is due, to some degree, to such things as deeply held resentments still lingering from the invasion/occupation of Iraq and the treatment of detainees, anti-Muslim signs during and after the campaign, and anti-Muslim rhetoric spewed on Beck/Limbaugh, etc. that are still a staple of some (not all) on the far right. But it probably stems more from the fact that across the US, the public has always (and will continue to) strongly support Israel's right to exist and live in peace with its neighbors.

What the AEI article failed to mention was the other poll that was part of the same Pew study....the perception and confidence of the US president as a world leader:

http://pewresearch.org/assets/publications/1289-2.gif

Significantly higher confidence in Obama among the Muslim nations - Egypt (+31), Jordan (+24), Lebanon (+13), Palestinian Territories (+15), Pakistan (+6), Indonesia (+48)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redux (Post 595846)

Uh OH...a poll?

:lol:

:mock:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redux (Post 595846)

Uh OH...a poll?

You obviously failed to read to the end of the article, and hence the point of it. This is like shooting Redux Fish in a barrel.:rolleyes:

Quote:

Opinion polls do not mean a hill of beans in cultures rendered incoherent by despotism, denial, rage, and irrational religion.The Pew Research Center for People and the Press, directed by Andrew Kohut, has led the research effort to prop up these pernicious myths: The trick is to employ polling methods oblivious to the cultural pathologies raging in Arab and Muslim societies. What does “public opinion” mean under Islamic regimes that outlaw political parties, control the media, underwrite hate speech in sermons and school textbooks, persecute religious minorities, and torture political dissidents? Pew researchers remain unburdened by these complicated realities.

Quote:

The Pew Research Center, advised by no less a partisan than former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, continues to make the now incomprehensible claim that “the unilateralist U.S. foreign policy” of George Bush was the engine of anti-Americanism the world over. In a summary report of its work over the last eight years, Pew researchers concluded: “In the view of much of the world, the United States has played the role of bully in the school yard, throwing its weight around with little regard for others’ interests.” Of Pew’s 25 surveys conducted since 2001, America’s image problem was designated “the central, unmistakable finding.”

Quote:

The actual unmistakable finding, confirmed by the resiliency of anti-Americanism in the era of Obama, is that opinion polls do not mean a hill of beans in cultures rendered incoherent by despotism, denial, rage, and irrational religion. Instead, such surveys merely allow partisans to use foreign narrators to voice their private grievances. These researchers surely realize that countless Arab and Muslim leaders are devoted to disseminating a perversely distorted image of the United States. Yet they carry on, blithely unconcerned that the abnormalities of Islamist societies—where the suicide bomber is a sanctified symbol of martyrdom—might represent an assault on the moral norms of the democratic West.

A more honest approach to polling could help us better understand America’s influence in the world. It might suggest how the ideals of equality, freedom, government by consent, religious liberty—the core doctrines of the American creed—pose a threat to despots and religious demagogues. That would require researchers, however, to suspend their agendas and begin asking tough, open-ended questions to more diverse audiences.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZenGum (Post 595856)

:lol:

:mock:

:mock:

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 595857)

You obviously failed to read to the end of the article, and hence the point of it. This is like shooting Redux Fish in a barrel.:rolleyes:

I read it and recognize that the American Enterprise Institute has a neo-con agenda that runs counter to the Pew study...and that many AEI scholars and fellows had formal roles in the Bush administration, including guys like Richard Pearl and Paul Wolfowicz (who were principle architects of Bush's Iraq policy) and others like Bush's UN ambassador John Bolton and Lynn Chaney.

Quote:

AEI scholars are considered to be some of the leading architects of the second Bush administration's public policy. More than twenty AEI scholars and fellows served either in a Bush administration policy post or on one of the government's many panels and commissions. Among the prominent former government officials now affiliated with AEI are former U.S. ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton, now an AEI senior fellow; former chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities Lynne Cheney, a longtime AEI senior fellow; former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, now an AEI senior fellow; former Dutch member of parliament Ayaan Hirsi Ali, an AEI visiting fellow, and former deputy secretary of defense Paul Wolfowitz, now an AEI visiting scholar. Other prominent individuals affiliated with AEI include David Frum, Kevin Hassett, Frederick W. Kagan, Leon Kass, Irving Kristol, Charles Murray, Michael Novak, Norman J. Ornstein, Richard Perle, Christina Hoff Sommers, and Peter J. Wallison.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America...-bush-speech-2

Is it any wonder that they might want to defend the Bush foreign policy (ie their own policy advice) and the Bush/Cheney legacy...right or wrong?

You made it clear in other discussions that you dont really care what others outside our border think about the US ("not one fucking bit") I think its important as long as it does not adversely impact the policy making process and the US national interests.

Again, we have different perspectives. I can accept that without making it personal. Can you?