The Cellar - View Single Post - We don't need another Bush or Clinton in the White House

crweeks64 · 10-10-2014, 08:53 PM

tw, First, I hope you are not linking me to Rush Limbaugh who I have never even listened to because I believe he may well be the biggest fraud ever. I detest his style and approach. Second, the Presidents you listed were all active. They enjoyed the Presidency and tried many and varied approaches in the domestic and foreign affairs areas. I think you can argue that Obama exercises restraint (that would be kind) but even his most ardent supporters (of which you certainly may be one of them) have a difficult time describing him as decisive. Also, you totally ignored the first part of my description i.e. lack of leadership. You create a straw man and then ask me to knock it down. I hope you have some time. Syria- he laid down a red line (use of chemical weapons) then balked when they crossed it. Then sought the Congress to weigh in and help him out and when they didn't get involved had Kerry broker a deal they now tout as a huge success except Kerry Himself said recently he would not be surprised to learn that Asad is stilling using chemical weapons (research it -don't take my word for it. Additionally, do we all remember when the administration was crowing that early on in the revolution that Asad was not long for the job? That was 160,000 civilian deaths ago. (do you like that number?) Ukraine- told Russia you better not invade Crimea or else! Ooops, I guess not. Told Russia, well we are really serious this time you better leave Ukraine alone or else! Has failed to do anything to push back against Russia's violations of international law against a country that should probably have been in NATO (reference your own recent comments on Turkey for the mind blowing implications of that) Promises to aid Ukraine and has done nothing (at least overtly) to back that up. Issues sanctions against Russia that have accomplished nothing and Europe half heartedly supports because they need Russian energy. Iraq- Specifically walks away from a status of forces agreement and leaves no significant American presence against all advisors, military and civilian, and now wonders why we are in the current mess with ISIS. Afghanistan- the one war he calls legitimate- was going to possibly leave without a status of forces but now probably (even him) has the audacity for which to walk away. Spoke about a surge of forces to end the war while telegraphing exactly when that end would be regardless of the surge. What were our brave men and women of the military to think about that? ISIS- aside from the above only acted against them when beheadings began and public opinion polls soared against his Foreign Policy (or more correctly lack there of) and demanded action. Promises to arm the Kurds and use them (and others) as our boots on the ground and hasn't given any weapons or assistance and now a Kurd city, Kobani, may fall to which I will predict massive atrocities by ISIS against the conquered foe whose only mistake was to rely upon action by this feckless President. He issues air strikes against ISIS and they are getting stronger or at least no signs of weakening. Oh yeah, and orders 3500 troops to West Africa to help in the fight against Ebola instead. Enough of Foreign affairs I hope that even you can concede me at least a point or two. Domestically: I think it is a stretch to say that we were heading towards another Great Depression, even so we didn't get there. Roosevelt did everything and anything to deal with the economic crisis he faced. He acted vigorously and swiftly. I do believe he is one of the greatest Presidents of all time. Although never mentioned and always conveniently forgotten, OBAMA HAD A MAJORITY OF BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS WHEN HE TOOK OFFICE FOR HIS FIRST TWO YEARS. Thus Obamacare, which even he was calling the Affordable Care Act during its disastrous launch and roll out. I believe he is back to calling it Obamacare again. I won't include that as inaction. That was definitely action regardless of whether one likes it or not. The point is that while the democrats were ramming Obamacare through without any republican support they lost the opportunity to do so much more with regard to jobs and the economy during that same period of time. The Obama administration must share some of that blame. Let's forget that Obama spent more time blaming the Bush administration for al the ills that had befallen us. I don't remember Roosevelt laying blame when he took office, rather he acted. Two years after Obama won the Presidency the republicans take control of ONE HALF of Congress. Ever since, Obama has been blaming them for his failure to act domestically. Indulge me a bit further, after all you wanted "facts" and "numbers". The debt crisis- The President had the power of the Presidency and the Senate but all he has down is kicked this can down the road and blamed the House for blocking his efforts. We had a debt commission he "commissioned" and he wouldn't follow their recommendations. He has continued to speak, but not act, about the dangers of failing to follow his policies. Take the fight to Congress, use the will of the people to get something done. The silence (or should I say inaction) is deafening. The Fed- The one area where he can attempt to exert a modicum of pressure he has laid off like he is there lap dog. Instead of quantitative easing which just floods the economy with more and more lower value dollars he should be working to strengthen the value of the dollar by dealing with the debt and deficit, making the economy more job friendly (and not low paying or minimum wage jobs) and encouraging manufacturing not strangling it with EPA regulations. Keystone pipeline- why in the world can't he just get this done? We can argue over how many jobs it will create but even the unions are for it for Pete's sake! Act! Please! Immigration- "act (yes, finally) or I will!" er maybe not until after the midterm, if at all. What? I thought we were going to finally do that "act" thing. I apologize for the length (which I assume you will call a rant) but you asked for facts and numbers which I have attempted to supply. tw, I respect your opinion which is why I even attempted this in the first place. Be fair and concede me a point or two if nothing else. Regardless, I am always of the opinion to "respectfully" agree to disagree. As always we may have to wait for history to run its course and by then where will we be? It is at least fun to debate in the meantime.

10-10-2014, 08:53 PM	#1
crweeks64 Fresh Incumbent Join Date: Oct 2014 Location: Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania Posts: 28	tw, First, I hope you are not linking me to Rush Limbaugh who I have never even listened to because I believe he may well be the biggest fraud ever. I detest his style and approach. Second, the Presidents you listed were all active. They enjoyed the Presidency and tried many and varied approaches in the domestic and foreign affairs areas. I think you can argue that Obama exercises restraint (that would be kind) but even his most ardent supporters (of which you certainly may be one of them) have a difficult time describing him as decisive. Also, you totally ignored the first part of my description i.e. lack of leadership. You create a straw man and then ask me to knock it down. I hope you have some time. Syria- he laid down a red line (use of chemical weapons) then balked when they crossed it. Then sought the Congress to weigh in and help him out and when they didn't get involved had Kerry broker a deal they now tout as a huge success except Kerry Himself said recently he would not be surprised to learn that Asad is stilling using chemical weapons (research it -don't take my word for it. Additionally, do we all remember when the administration was crowing that early on in the revolution that Asad was not long for the job? That was 160,000 civilian deaths ago. (do you like that number?) Ukraine- told Russia you better not invade Crimea or else! Ooops, I guess not. Told Russia, well we are really serious this time you better leave Ukraine alone or else! Has failed to do anything to push back against Russia's violations of international law against a country that should probably have been in NATO (reference your own recent comments on Turkey for the mind blowing implications of that) Promises to aid Ukraine and has done nothing (at least overtly) to back that up. Issues sanctions against Russia that have accomplished nothing and Europe half heartedly supports because they need Russian energy. Iraq- Specifically walks away from a status of forces agreement and leaves no significant American presence against all advisors, military and civilian, and now wonders why we are in the current mess with ISIS. Afghanistan- the one war he calls legitimate- was going to possibly leave without a status of forces but now probably (even him) has the audacity for which to walk away. Spoke about a surge of forces to end the war while telegraphing exactly when that end would be regardless of the surge. What were our brave men and women of the military to think about that? ISIS- aside from the above only acted against them when beheadings began and public opinion polls soared against his Foreign Policy (or more correctly lack there of) and demanded action. Promises to arm the Kurds and use them (and others) as our boots on the ground and hasn't given any weapons or assistance and now a Kurd city, Kobani, may fall to which I will predict massive atrocities by ISIS against the conquered foe whose only mistake was to rely upon action by this feckless President. He issues air strikes against ISIS and they are getting stronger or at least no signs of weakening. Oh yeah, and orders 3500 troops to West Africa to help in the fight against Ebola instead. Enough of Foreign affairs I hope that even you can concede me at least a point or two. Domestically: I think it is a stretch to say that we were heading towards another Great Depression, even so we didn't get there. Roosevelt did everything and anything to deal with the economic crisis he faced. He acted vigorously and swiftly. I do believe he is one of the greatest Presidents of all time. Although never mentioned and always conveniently forgotten, OBAMA HAD A MAJORITY OF BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS WHEN HE TOOK OFFICE FOR HIS FIRST TWO YEARS. Thus Obamacare, which even he was calling the Affordable Care Act during its disastrous launch and roll out. I believe he is back to calling it Obamacare again. I won't include that as inaction. That was definitely action regardless of whether one likes it or not. The point is that while the democrats were ramming Obamacare through without any republican support they lost the opportunity to do so much more with regard to jobs and the economy during that same period of time. The Obama administration must share some of that blame. Let's forget that Obama spent more time blaming the Bush administration for al the ills that had befallen us. I don't remember Roosevelt laying blame when he took office, rather he acted. Two years after Obama won the Presidency the republicans take control of ONE HALF of Congress. Ever since, Obama has been blaming them for his failure to act domestically. Indulge me a bit further, after all you wanted "facts" and "numbers". The debt crisis- The President had the power of the Presidency and the Senate but all he has down is kicked this can down the road and blamed the House for blocking his efforts. We had a debt commission he "commissioned" and he wouldn't follow their recommendations. He has continued to speak, but not act, about the dangers of failing to follow his policies. Take the fight to Congress, use the will of the people to get something done. The silence (or should I say inaction) is deafening. The Fed- The one area where he can attempt to exert a modicum of pressure he has laid off like he is there lap dog. Instead of quantitative easing which just floods the economy with more and more lower value dollars he should be working to strengthen the value of the dollar by dealing with the debt and deficit, making the economy more job friendly (and not low paying or minimum wage jobs) and encouraging manufacturing not strangling it with EPA regulations. Keystone pipeline- why in the world can't he just get this done? We can argue over how many jobs it will create but even the unions are for it for Pete's sake! Act! Please! Immigration- "act (yes, finally) or I will!" er maybe not until after the midterm, if at all. What? I thought we were going to finally do that "act" thing. I apologize for the length (which I assume you will call a rant) but you asked for facts and numbers which I have attempted to supply. tw, I respect your opinion which is why I even attempted this in the first place. Be fair and concede me a point or two if nothing else. Regardless, I am always of the opinion to "respectfully" agree to disagree. As always we may have to wait for history to run its course and by then where will we be? It is at least fun to debate in the meantime.