http://www.winonadailynews.com/news/...cc4c002e0.html
Printable View
I have to agree with you, Richard. Iran fires long-range missiles, we have a crisis in Afghanistan, and where is our dear prez? He's worried about getting the Olympics in Chicago! Now, I know he's from there, but geez! I thought he was the entire country's president, not just Chicago's. I guess he doesn't care what happens to our soldiers, does he? I didn't vote for the guy, but I was more than willing to give him a chance. He's getting about a D- in my book.:(
It's an old chestnut; just fill in the name of your choice.Quote:
Originally Posted by RICHARD
Calling Fox fixed is calling the faked news Fox!
I am not happy that Obama is going to Denmark. I rather hope Chicago does not get the Olympics (as I hope to be back living there by then!) My concern is that if he goes and does not get it for Chicago - the Haters will have something else to be snarky about.:rolleyes::rolleyes:
Well Sara, I know for sure that Michelle Obama is coming on friday and I can't wait to see it on TV. I do hope Barack Obama will come too. They will be SO welcome! I'm sure at least 95 % of Danes is happy with your new President - just think of the alternative! :eek:
Although you may be in Chicago in 2016, you'll survive it! :D
Actually?Quote:
Originally Posted by katladyd
The country runs far more efficiently when he is out of the country.
-----------------------
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7715016.stm
I tried to find this story on MSNBC's site and got nothing under 'Obama, tan" but got a hit on the AOL website. HMM, is that racism?;)
Indeed, god will save us from imbeciles!
Like I said...the haters keep looking for reason to justify their hate...
And they do hate...don't they?
Wonder why?????
The President's personal polling numbers have always been high. They
still are.:)
I can understand, the bad economy, two unpaid for wars going on, failed
Auto companies, and people losing their life savings, would tend to make
people scared & upset. Who was watching the store the last eight years?
Obama is getting all the anger directed his way.
You know Liz...it is hard to counter irrational hate. Some people do not care what he has done, what he is trying to do or what others failed to do.
All they know is they hate him. He is a marxist, communist, socialist, nazi, moron, imbecile and well...you know.
That he was elected by a majority (unlike GWB in 1980) is irrelevant to the Haters. Obviously, they have a low opinion of the voters.
The truth is...to the Haters...the rest of us... are not as smart as they are ---morons we are you know!:D;):rolleyes:;):D
All we can do is hope that some day we will be as smart as the Haters!:rolleyes::rolleyes::D
And then we too can hate irrationally!
When a long time liberal and CBS reporter calls Fox fair and actually makes a case for it, Im inclined to believe him. When the same lefty makes the case that the fix is in with the Main Stream News Media, again Im inclined to believe him. When a long time Clinton advisor does the same, once again Im inclined to believe him.
Obama should be running our country, not running around campaigning, or trying to help out his friends in Chicago.
We had 8 years of Irrational hate, that hate came with riots and violent protests. Those haters are now somehow rational? Why did they hate, after all they did hate?
The New "irrational" hate is peaceful, respectful, and nonviolent. And OMG they are armed and nobody got shot.
_________________________
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/var/...er_29_2009.jpg
Really high numbers there.
A bad economy made worse, not paying attention to whats going on in two wars, failing at bailing out two auto companies. Ford seems to be doing alright, wait, they didnt take the money. Yeah I can see why Obama is catching a lot of flack while he is off trying to seal the bid for Chicago, taking the family on vacations on our dime, and running around acting like he is still on the campaign trail instead of doing his job.
:confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Edwina's Secretary
_________________
So now maybe somebody can justify and explain why the hatred we saw over the last eight years, the riots, the destruction of property, and the assaults was rational hatred? And the Peaceful, calm, and respectful demonstrations we have seen this year are irrational?
Truth FTW!Quote:
Originally Posted by RICHARD
-----------------------
He is half white, of course he can tan, saying he cant tan would be racist.Quote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7715016.stm
I tried to find this story on MSNBC's site and got nothing under 'Obama, tan" but got a hit on the AOL website. HMM, is that racism?;)
Indeed, god will save us from imbeciles!
I have to laugh at BO's attempt to get the Olympics in '16.
He supposes that his trip to Olso will somehow sway the IOC. Pretty much the choice already has been made - RDJ, Tokyo and Chicago and Madrid have already given their proposals and having the reps from those countries/cities is really just a photo op for the winners.
Sorry, but showing up the day of the announcement of who gets the games is a just an excuse to "get out of the house and go for a ride".
If Chicago does win the bid, they can be assured of getting bail out money to make that dream come true. ;) It's more money that the city, IOC and government has to pony up for the games and god knows what will happen to the folks living around the proposed sites for new venues that will be built by "private donors" -which you can read as BO's pals and the rest of the people who will look to milk the Games, the money and the people who will get shafted should Chicago win.
Buena Suerte folks, you are gonna need it.:eek::confused:
BTW.
Lost Angeles is still spending money on sports programs from the '84 games, thanks to Mitt Romney. El Lay had almost 200 million in revenues after the singing and dancing was over.:D
The Haters on Facebook.... Haters
Hatred breds hatred.
And it leads to things like this.
I suppose some people feel sorry for the Haters...so filled with self-loathing that they must bash anyone who they think should be beneath them and is instead successful.
And I suppose some people think this poll was "protected political speech."
I think this hate is poisoning our society and doing far more damage to this country than any president or congress could do.
Oops,Quote:
Originally Posted by RICHARD
I meant Peter Ueberroth.....I was smitten by Romney at the 2002 torch run..:D
My mistake.
I sure was curious what Mitt Romney had to do with LA Olympics. He was involved with the Salt Lake City Olympics.
And isn't the meeting in Copenhagen rather than Oslo? Denmark not Norway?
Is there anything else in your posts about this that is not...correct?
So 8 years of hatred, and promoting the death of Bush at protests, online forums, and in the MSM is rational? Im sure the union thugs that beat people up at the townhall meetings were rational responses to people wanting to be heard by their representatives.
9 months of peaceful, respectful, protests, and 1 hater Obama plant on Facebook poll equals irrational hatred?
Somebody needs to tell the POTUS to get off the campaign trail and do his job!
_______________
For those that dont know, it was Ronald Reagan who won in 1980, not GWB, by a far larger margin then BHO won.
Quote:
Reagan won the election, carrying 44 states with 489 electoral votes to 49 electoral votes for Carter (representing six states and Washington, D.C.).
For the race baiters.... Is Disagreeing With Obama Racist?
Deliberately quoted without a source or link.:DQuote:
Former president Jimmy Carter said, "I think an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man." That's from a man who earlier referred to Obama as "This black boy" on the Jim Lehrer "News Hour." New York Times social critic Maureen Dowd said, in reference to Rep. Joe Wilson's shouting "Liar" during Obama's address on health care before the joint session of Congress, "Some people just can't believe a black man is president and will never accept it." Washington Post's Howard Kurtz said he "began to suspect that race was a factor for at least some critics when I heard them shouting about 'the Constitution' and 'taking our country back.'" Kurtz asked whether the massive tea parties and other public protests reflect a "distinct discomfort with the country's first black president." House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charlie Rangel, Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, New York Gov. David Paterson, MSNBC's Chris Matthews, and other leftists claim that racism is behind criticism of President Obama.
For these people, it is inconceivable that many Americans are outraged by the president's spending policies, budget deficits, industry takeovers, not to mention the appointment of Czars, a term that ought to be alien and offensive to American values whether used by a Republican or Democratic president.
Obama's presidency is truly a remarkable commentary on the goodness of Americans and how far we've come in resolving matters of race. Obama convincingly won votes in states with insignificant black populations, such as the New England states, Iowa and Minnesota. For the nation as a whole, he managed 53 percent of the popular vote and 365 of the Electoral College votes when he only needed 270 to win. So now Jimmy Carter, Dowd, Rangel and other race-carders want us to believe that the massive discontent with Obama is racism. I say nonsense!
Speaking for the president, Robert Gibbs, White House spokesman, in no uncertain terms said that the president did not think the criticism directed at him and his policies was based on the color of his skin. President Obama refused to answer a reporter who queried him about Carter's comments. When Obama did respond, and much to his credit, he insisted that the "biggest driver" of the vitriol was distrust of government. His response was not only correct but the nation is better off as a result of it. We don't need the kind of divisiveness that would surely arise if Obama himself played the race card.
Race is no longer the problem that it once was. That doesn't mean there are not white and black bigots and that every vestige of racial discrimination has been eliminated. What little racial discrimination remains is nowhere near the insurmountable barrier it once was. For the most part, white bigots are no longer respected among whites and I look forward to the day when black bigots are no longer respected among blacks.
When one says that race is no longer the problem it once was, it is not the same as saying that there are not major problems that confront a large segment of the black population. Grossly fraudulent education is a major problem but it has nothing to do with racial discrimination as evidenced by the fact that the worse education received is in the very cities where blacks dominate the political structure. Crime is a major problem but it has nothing to do with racial discrimination, particularly in light of the fact that blacks commit most of the violent crime in America and well over 90 percent of their victims are black. The fact of a 70 percent illegitimacy rate and only 35 percent of black children raised in two-parent homes is a major problem but it has nothing to do with racial discrimination.
Americans should disavow and not fall prey to the racial rope-a-dope being played on us by the nation's race hustlers.
I wonder if the three hikers being held in Iran have anything to do with the talks that the U.S. attended?
Seems like we got a pair of 'journalists' back from N Korea by doing a little "talking".:rolleyes:
What will we have to give up now?
Plus, I hope we do apologize for having our intrepid citizens violate borders, again.:mad::rolleyes:
---------------------------------
Who is going to pay for the trips the Obama's made to Oslo?
A pundit just said that BO spent more time with this trip than he spent with Gen. McChrystal talking about Afghanistan.
Had Chi-town won the Olympic bid I can dare to say "insufferable" would have been a word to add to the political blogs across the country.
It's going to Rio.
I can see Rio de Janeiro from my front porch.
I have no idea who is paying for a trip to Oslo or when they are going but the Chicago Olympic Committee paid for their trip to Copenhagen.Quote:
Originally Posted by RICHARD
I am sure you need to make some snark about that.
Just read in the Copehagen news that each country in the running had a head of state or government present.
That was Copenhagen, Richard. Oslo is the capital of Norway. Copenhagen is the capital of Denmark, the home of the Little Mermaid statue, made famous by Hans Christian Andersen.Quote:
Originally Posted by RICHARD
I guess to some people all Scandanavians look alike....:rolleyes::rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Grace
Richard, do you have any thoughts about Meg Whitman who wants to run for Governor of California?
I ask, because I just read this by Susan Estrich.
I realize RICHARD is the official "California spokesperson" but I'll answer anyway. I would really, really like to support Meg Whitman. I think her business experience would be very useful in a state that is way too "anti-employer" for my taste.
When we came here I had to take a crash course in California labor law. For example, this is one of only three states that mandates daily overtime. If a non-exempt employee does not take a meal break the company must pay a one hour penalty. Until a recent case, employers were being fined if employees did not take their rest breaks on time. Imagine talking to a sales person or the person wiating on your table who says..."I must go on my break now" and you have to start over with another employee.
But the not voting - not being registered to vote really bothers me. I have a real problem with people who do not vote. Often as not they are the biggest complainers who know exactly how things should be fixed. But they can't be bothered to participate.
Not declared Democratic or Republican - not a big deal. I have never declared for either party. But not even registered to vote until age 46?
That bothers me.
A $1.2 million dollar goose egg for the POTUS in Copenhagen. Now maybe he can meet with McCrystal and start doing his job.
I love Meg Ryan and would vote for her any day of the week.
------------------
Remember that the FLOTUS went separately to Copenhagen..
She ran up a tab too.:eek:
Grace,
LOL, now do you see why I need a globe????
I'd sugget a history book to go with that globe!:D
I have to go and check who won the pool for which Hater and what time. They are predictable at least!
Obama should not go to whatever that city is where it cold. What a waste. Olympics are terrible. He should stay and talk to the general who was involved in the cover up and abuse of Pat Tillman. Olympics are terrible. Cost too much money.
He goes (as does the head of every country in the running)...Chicago is not selected and the Haters?
Olympics are wonderful. Make people feel good about their city. Obama is a loser. He didn't get the Olympics.
You guys sure do provide lots of laughs! Thanks! Now I need to go and see who won.
Obama chose McChrystal to be in charge of the war in Afghanistan, he could do more to back the man.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell
I guess Chicago and his friends getting the Olympics where more important then our troops lives.
The $1.2 million that it took to get Obama and friends to Copenhagen and back could have been spent better by backing the General he chose.
The new definition of hate, expecting the POTUS to Do His Job.
______________
By doing his job I dont mean appoint a man who praised the pioneer of NAMBLA as the School Safety Czar. A man who advised a minor student not to disclose he was having sex with an older man.
Quote:
Originally Posted by blue
SCAPE GOAT. Every politician needs a scapegoat.:(
Check it out,
I can still see Rio de Janiero from my porch.
Y o owe me a keyboard. I spit my drink all over it. The ewe no longer works.Quote:
Originally Posted by RICHARD
How do we get rid of this guy????...he is a disgrace to the red, white and blue....
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090525/zirin2
...Quote:
Originally Posted by Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell
I swear, I have wrecked so many KBs that I should have stock in the company.Quote:
Originally Posted by blue
DUDE, I am sorry!
BO has handed off the HC reform issue to Pelosi-lol, let her take all the flack- Put McChrystal in charge of the war, when the Gen comes back with his assessment, he is brushed off. How many other people have been delegated 'CHANGE"?
LOLOLOLOLOL,
Mr. Cool goes to pitch the Olympics - seriously, I watched the presentation LIVE on Thursday/Friday morning. The athletes were dry-and BO's pitch was all about him and his election.
Seems like his, "America bad, We Sorry" talks were taken to heart.
Who really wants to come to a Olympics being held in a country that just elected a black man to office? Or has bombed and killed millions of people across the planet? Or maybe someone in the IOC saw the film of the kid being killed by being beaten with boards on the street in Chi Town??
BO wanted to walk out his door and go do a lap at the World's Biggest Party-
He said something like "I want to walk out my back door......"
It's all about you now?
I can see Rio de Janiero from my front porch.
When NFL player-turned-Army Ranger Pat Tillman died at the hands of US troops in a case of "friendly fire," the spin machine at the Pentagon went into overdrive. Rumsfeld and company couldn't have their most high-profile soldier dying in such an inelegant fashion, especially with the release of those pesky photos from Abu Ghraib hitting the airwaves. So an obscene lie was told to Tillman's family, his friends and the American public.
The chickenhawks in charge, whose only exposure to war was watching John Wayne movies, claimed that he died charging a hill and was cut down by the radical Islamic enemies of freedom. In the weeks preceding his death, Tillman was beginning to question what exactly he was fighting for, telling friends that he believed the war in Iraq was " [expletive] illegal."
He may not have known what he was fighting for, but it's now clear what he died for: public relations. Today, after five years, six investigations and two Congressional hearings, questions still linger about how Tillman died and why it was covered up.
Now the man who greased the chain of command that orchestrated this great deception is prepared to assume total control of US operations in Afghanistan: Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal.
It was McChrystal who approved Tillman's posthumous Silver Star, a medal given explicitly for combat, even though he later testified that he "suspected" friendly fire.
Im going to watch Iron Maiden Rock In Rio in their honor, they deserve the Olympics.
Chicago did not need a new soccer stadium anyway.
Source, http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090525/zirin2Quote:
Originally Posted by Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrel
And now the Tillman family, amidst bipartisan praise for Obama's new general, must once again raise the inconvenient truth.
Pat's father, Pat Tillman Sr., told the Associated Press, "I do believe that guy participated in a falsified homicide investigation."
Mary Tillman, who excoriated McChrystal in her book, Boots on the Ground by Dusk: My Tribute to Pat Tillman, said, "It is imperative that Lt. Gen. McChrystal be scrutinized carefully during the Senate hearings."
Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said in response:
We feel terrible for what the Tillman family went through, but this matter has been investigated thoroughly by the Pentagon, by the Congress, by outside experts, and all of them have come to the same conclusion: that there was no wrongdoing by Gen. McChrystal.
Morrell's statement has more spin than a washing machine powered by a V-8 engine. McChrystal has never explained why the early reports of Tillman's death were covered up, why his clothes and field journal were burned and destroyed on the scene or why Pat's brother Kevin, serving alongside him in the Rangers, was lied to on the spot. Even the cover-up was covered up. This should be a cause for dismissal--or indictment--not promotion.
Ibid
From the Washington Post -
Quote:
A General's Public Pressure
By Bruce Ackerman
Saturday, October 3, 2009
The president, the Constitution tells us, is the commander in chief. But is it true?
In a speech in London on Thursday, Gen. Stanley McChrystal publicly intervened in the debate over Afghanistan. Vice President Biden has suggested that we focus on fighting al-Qaeda and refrain from using our troops to prop up the government of President Hamid Karzai. But when this strategic option was raised at his presentation, McChrystal said it was a formula for "Chaos-istan." When asked whether he would support it, he said, "The short answer is: No."
As commanding general in Afghanistan, McChrystal has no business making such public pronouncements. Under law, he doesn't have the right to attend the National Security Council as it decides our strategy. To the contrary, the Goldwater-Nichols Act of 1986 explicitly names the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff as the National Security Council's exclusive military adviser. If the president wanted McChrystal's advice, he was perfectly free to ask him to accompany Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs, when the council held its first meeting on Afghanistan this week.
But Obama did not extend the invitation, even though McChrystal was leaving Kabul and could have gone to Washington easily. Instead, Obama asked the general to report to the council via a brief teleconference.
News of McChrystal's position had been leaked to Bob Woodward and was published in The Post early last week. But it is one thing for some nameless Washington insider to engage in a characteristic power play; quite another for McChrystal to pressure the president in public to adopt his strategy. This is a plain violation of the principle of civilian control.
McChrystal seemed curiously blind to this point. He emphasized that the president had "encouraged" him to be blunt when making his grim report on Afghanistan. But future presidents won't be so encouraging if they know that their commanders might create political problems if they think that their recommendations will be overruled. Instead, they will insist that their commanders tell them only what they want to hear. Confidentiality is a condition for candid communications between commanders and the commander in chief.
McChrystal was almost cavalier in dismissing this point. After praising his superiors for encouraging straight talk, he laughingly suggested that "they may change their minds and crush me some day." This is precisely backward: Generals shouldn't need to be told that it is wrong to lecture their presidents in public. Perhaps McChrystal was misled by the precedent set by Gen. David Petraeus, who strongly supported President Bush's military surge in Iraq in 2007. Though Petraeus publicly endorsed the surge, this happened only after Bush made his decision. Petraeus was backing up his commander in chief, not trying to preempt him.
Nevertheless, precedents have the habit of adding up. Unless McChrystal publicly recognizes that he has crossed the line, future generals will become even more aggressive in their efforts to browbeat presidents.
We have no need for a repeat of the showdown between President Harry Truman and Gen. Douglas MacArthur over Korea. Truman faced down his general the last time around, but it was a bruising experience.
Though McChrystal may feel "crushed," he should show more self-restraint. Indeed, his breach should provoke a broader discussion of the meaning of civilian control in the 21st century. It may well make sense for the Pentagon, or a special commission, to frame more concrete guidelines so that we may avoid future breaches.
The writer is a professor at Yale Law School.
McChrystal should be chastized by the President. (in private if necessary)
Obama wiill not be lead around by the nose the way GWB did. At least I hope
not.
EFF YOU Ackerman.Quote:
Originally Posted by Grace
You dimwitted wanker....
Of course Mc Chrystal will make public pronouncements when it concerns HIS CHARGES!
That is what I mean about scape goats.
The reality of the war has edged it's way into the reality of the current presidency.
Close down Gitmo and bring the troops back home, you dope.
----------------------------------
McChrystal was almost cavalier in dismissing this point. After praising his superiors for encouraging straight talk, he laughingly suggested that "they may change their minds and crush me some day."
LOLOLOL,
Just like every situation where the "BOSS" makes you THINK you opinion counts?
When you go against what they believe they distance themselces from your sorry rear and leave you out to dry.
SCAPE goat's head soup.
Imagine that,
A soldier who is literally in charge with thousands of lives having an opinion about how to keep his men alive.
Boy, does he have some nerve.