OT: Election/Politics thread, Part 6

[JRod]

So I can't call him incompetent, if I never served as President.


Your posts are comical. You logical is pathetic, however.

Some people have the capacity to understand the complexity and thorniness of the issues a president faces. These people, if they are intellectually honest, know that both they and their favorite politician would stumble from time to time in the same role.

You are not one of those people. Therefore, you would need to actually experience the role personally in order to comprehend. I am reminded of the episode of Metalocalypse where the lead singer became Governor of Florida.

It's always funny reading the unprincipled screed of political hacks. Their morals and ideals vascillate, and the only constant is their party alignment. If Bush had left Iraq alone, the Democrats would have become hawkish, and you, their fatihful lapdog, would be talking about what a failure the administration was for allowing Iraq to dominate the Middle East and use its oil money for weapons programs. If Gore had been President and had not killed or caught bin Laden, Democrats and you, their faithful lapdog, would have been minimizing his importance while Republicans would be trying to score political points off it.

That is why the majority of political discourse is mindless, intellectually dishonest tripe served by liars, hypocrites, opportunists, and pliable goons.

You want to make this out into a what-if statement. Only a few here have said if Gore was President what would have happened.

A stumble is what we are calling the last eight years? Failure after failure is what his administration will be remember for. When your highlight, or when historians recall the bright spots, there will be a speech after 9/11 and the No Child Left Behind act. Which is really an unfunded madate but whatever.

Here's the report card and you tell me if these was just mere blunders.

Afghanistan
Iraq
Katrina
Financial Collapse

We haven't had an attack but they still want to attack us.
We have barely secured Iraq to the point where the instable government can withstand attacks and political pressure.
We have really done very little for the poor after Katrina. Most haven't returned, many never will.
We are entering a financial collapse the likes we haven't seen in generations. Bush's last course of action, a blank checks to banks which may or may not have worked like we are told.

There's stumbling and then there's failure. If you can't see the two then I guess you too fall into your own category of mindless political discourse.

My typing is a blunder an abject blunder. Those four items alone are abject failure of an administration left to President Obama to figure out and deal with.

[pk500]

When your highlight, or when historians recall the bright spots, there will be a speech after 9/11 and the No Child Left Behind act.

Ask almost any teacher: No Child Left Behind is a complete catastrophe that forces teachers to educate students on how to take standardized tests, not teach them actual subjects. No Child Left Behind should have been named No Standardized Test Left Behind.

Pretty funny that your attempt at backhanded praise for Bush lists one of his abject failures.

Take care,
PK

[JRod]

Let's go the dictionary for what incompetent means...
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/incompetent

1: not legally qualified
2: inadequate to or unsuitable for a particular purpose
3 a: lacking the qualities needed for effective action b: unable to function properly

I think Bush fits under 2 & 3.

Where is that photo of the dead horse still being beaten when I need it?

Seriously though, it is easy to sit there and cast aspersions on others from quite the distance. Have YOU ever been anywhere remotely near a President in their day to day tasks? If not, then I find your comments above to be just as irrelevant as anyone elses who have not been exposed to what goes on day in and day out. And since you have tarbrushed many who DO work in the government as incompetent with your other comments above, how would any of THEM be qualified to determine if Bush was competent or incompetent? Anyone sitting where the average American sits doesn't have the first f***in clue what goes on in the Oval Office day in and day out.....

In guess in a Democracy we can't criticize the leader if we haven't served that post. The bar for criticising the President has change in the last 8 years. No one could because we were in a war. Then it was unpatriotic. Now it's because, one needs, to serve in that post, or be near to the post, to criticize.

Then I guess you need to shut up for the next 8 years and not say anything about Obama since you have no possible idea what it is like to be President. Since you have never been around the man, you don't know him either.

I never said many who work in government. Alexander de Toqueville a book well worth reading, said it in much more eloquent terms. Democracy doesn't require the best to be in office. Our system is so that the worst and the best have an equal opportunity to serve.

[JRod]

When your highlight, or when historians recall the bright spots, there will be a speech after 9/11 and the No Child Left Behind act.

Ask almost any teacher: No Child Left Behind is a complete catastrophe that forces teachers to educate students on how to take standardized tests, not teach them actual subjects. No Child Left Behind should have been named No Standardized Test Left Behind.

Pretty funny that your attempt at backhanded praise for Bush lists one of his abject failures.

Take care,
PK

I was trying to be positive. Anyway, it's the sentiment among historians, that NCLB (I don't agree with it) is one of his brigh spots.

[Brando70]

Some people have the capacity to understand the complexity and thorniness of the issues a president faces.

Which makes it especially difficult when one of those people gets elected. Twice.

But oh, how we enjoyed the beers we had with him.

[RobVarak]

When your highlight, or when historians recall the bright spots, there will be a speech after 9/11 and the No Child Left Behind act.

Ask almost any teacher: No Child Left Behind is a complete catastrophe that forces teachers to educate students on how to take standardized tests, not teach them actual subjects.

Pretty funny that your attempt at backhanded praise for Bush lists one of his abject failures.

Take care,
PK

That's definitely a problem with NCLB, but I have a troublingly high percentage of friends and family who are teachers and the legacy is far more complex than that. It's like the Patriot Act, something that is far, far too multi-dimensional to be dismissed briskly or with a blanket condemnation.


JRod, I'm amused by your post about how Bush could've somehow conducted "oversight" with respect to speculators in the oil markets. Even for someone as aggressive about pushing the envelope of executive power as Bush, there's really no way that he could singlehandedly chose to regulate international commodities trading. I'm put in the mind of Katrina, where people criticize him for not being "imperial" enough. Talk about damned if you do...

[pk500]

I was trying to be positive. Anyway, it's the sentiment among historians, that NCLB (I don't agree with it) is one of his brigh spots.

Historians aren't in the classroom educating young kids.

Take care,
PK

[pk500]

That's definitely a problem with NCLB, but I have a troublingly high percentage of friends and family who are teachers and the legacy is far more complex than that.

Same here, and I don't know one who thinks NCLB has helped the American educational system. Not one.

Must be those damn liberal New Yorkers.

Take care,
PK

[bdoughty]

Your posts are comical. You logical is pathetic, however.

Posts like these are why this forum needs a handy dandy report inappropriate reply to mod submission link. Much easier than typing a PM.

Oh and to JackB and the others who have used the terminology. Can we stop with the "post of the year" junk? It is getting as tired as "fanboy" was in gaming discussions.

[fsquid]

Your posts are comical. You logical is pathetic, however.

Posts like these are why this forum needs a handy dandy report inappropriate reply to mod submission link. Much easier than typing a PM.

Oh and to JackB and the others who have used the terminology. Can we stop with the "post of the year" junk? It is getting as tired as "fanboy" was in gaming discussions.

POST OF THE FECKING YEAR!!

[Rodster]

Anyone sitting where the average American sits doesn't have the first f***in clue what goes on in the Oval Office day in and day out.....

That's where West Wing and 24 comes in.

[pk500]

Anyone sitting where the average American sits doesn't have the first f***in clue what goes on in the Oval Office day in and day out.....

That's where West Wing and 24 comes in.

Come on, hasn't everyone played Democracy 2 or President Forever?

http://positech.co.uk/democracy2/index.html

http://theoryspark.com/political_games/ ... /index.htm



Take care,
PK

[FatPitcher]

Anyone sitting where the average American sits doesn't have the first f***in clue what goes on in the Oval Office day in and day out.....

That's where West Wing and 24 comes in.

The West Wing has dramatically increased the number of Americans who think they know what they are talking about when it comes to politics

[Rodster]

Anyone sitting where the average American sits doesn't have the first f***in clue what goes on in the Oval Office day in and day out.....

That's where West Wing and 24 comes in.

The West Wing has dramatically increased the number of Americans who think they know what they are talking about when it comes to politics

You may have missed my sarcasm.

[GameSeven]

Oh and to JackB and the others who have used the terminology. Can we stop with the "post of the year" junk? It is getting as tired as "fanboy" was in gaming discussions.

Well, mine was intended to be satirical, but duly noted

[Teal]

Well considering there's only been 43 men to fill his shoes, you probably don't have the ability to defend him then do you? Or to make any assessments of the job he did.

I'm not trying to defend anything. But the elitist, nose-in-the-air smell around the "assessment" of 'total incompetence' actually smacks of pretty significant ignorance, rather than what you were probably trying to go for, which would seem to be 'the-smartest-guy-in-the-room' award. You'll likely spend the next four years defending the current occupant of the white house, to boot.

So I can't call him incompetent, if I never served as President.


Your posts are comical. You logical is pathetic, however.

Coming from you, that's a compliment. JRod, you really don't know your asshole from your elbow...but boy, do you like to think that you do. And boy, oh boy, how you love to strut around with your peacock feathers spread out, head held high, looking down your beak at the pathetic humanoids who don't share your 'highbrow' opinions. The only person in this room who reeks of pathetic and comical at the moment is you, poindexter. But, of course, I don't expect you to see it. You've got your head too far up a donkey's ass to see anything with any clarity. You are the perfect human representation of my new, improved, and proven-true-more-and-more-everytime-you-post-in-the-politics-thread avatar. Half witted adherence to the liberal machine doesn't disguise well as intelligence, but you sure give it the ol' college try.

Winston Churchill was right: If you're 18 and conservative, you have no heart. If you're 30 and liberal, you have no brain...

[DivotMaker]

1. In guess in a Democracy we can't criticize the leader if we haven't served that post. The bar for criticising the President has change in the last 8 years. No one could because we were in a war. Then it was unpatriotic. Now it's because, one needs, to serve in that post, or be near to the post, to criticize.

2. Then I guess you need to shut up for the next 8 years and not say anything about Obama since you have no possible idea what it is like to be President. Since you have never been around the man, you don't know him either.

1. Is that what I stated or even implied? YOU and others are sitting here criticizing ONE PERSON for the failures of an entire ADMINISTRATION. You also claim this ONE PERSON is responsible for the oil price manipulations, the recession, etc.....and then have the gall to claim he was incompetent. YOU and others are criticizing him without knowing everything that he had to deal with on a daily basis. I have not once stated that people did not have the right to criticize the man, but at least have the common decency to get your story straight before you make such bold accusations. I think claiming ANYONE who is or has been President of this country to be incompetent is disrespectful and the height of arrogance. Neither you nor I have been President or to my knowledge even run for the office, so I ask out loud how you can accuse any President of being incompetent. I do not believe anyone running for President can bullshit 150-300 million people well enough to hide incompetence. Now Congress, that is a different story.

2. Never said I knew either of them, did I. I am also not sitting in the comfort of my home flinging wild accusations about things I don't know all the facts about. I simply think it is disrespectful and disingenuous to call any President incompetent or to even pretend that we know what they deal with day in and day out.

[JRod]

2. Never said I knew either of them, did I. I am also not sitting in the comfort of my home flinging wild accusations about things I don't know all the facts about. I simply think it is disrespectful and disingenuous to call any President incompetent or to even pretend that we know what they deal with day in and day out.

Wild accusations.

Incompetent is incompetent. He failed at being President of the United States. You don't need any degree or to know the man that that last 8 years were a failure. Only those so far-removed from reality can say Cheney and he were successful. They polarized the country to the level of hateful rhetoric. They seemingly did little on the war on terror except that we have not had another attack but the terrorists are still out there. He failed when a natural disaster pummeled the gulf coast. And well the financial crisis at best was just dumb luck, at worst, his failure to properly attack the crisis before Obama took office, might have made it worse. He did nothing on the middle east. Russia is more Kremlin than Democratic. Iran is even closer to nuclear weaponization. He was not a fiscally responsible conservative.

The President is the executive of the executive branch of government. He appoints and oversees his administration. Congress only allocates money and can provide oversight. The president is the reason for the failure of his administration. Who do you want to blame...oh poor Bush he had it so hard.

Lincoln had it hard and he preserved the union. FDR managed the worst depression the world had ever seen and led US to a victorious position before he died. Competent men might not have been able to avoid the disasters Bush had to endure, but they might have tackled them differently.

Oh now it's just disrespectful to call any President incompetent. I don't pretend to know what he goes through, but I do know that he had opportunities to leave this country in a better place relative to the situation.

His failures might not be as criminal as Nixon but he's not going to be in the top 35 of US Presidents.

You guys cling on to whatever you need to, in order to feel better about Bush. His administration was a failure. He presided over that administration. Do the math.

[DivotMaker]

Whatever jrod...keep sipping that Bush-did-EVERYTHING-WRONG-and-it-is-ALL-HIS-FAULT koolaid because it is obvious that is what lets you sleep at night....

[Teal]

Whatever jrod...keep sipping that Bush-did-EVERYTHING-WRONG-and-it-is-ALL-HIS-FAULT koolaid because it is obvious that is what lets you sleep at night....

No, his superior intellect lets him sleep at night. The knowledge that everyone who doesn't share his opinion is automatically wrong, and even moreso if you call him out on it. So Divot...you're comical and pathetic, too. Get used to it.

[Teal]

[FatPitcher]

2. Never said I knew either of them, did I. I am also not sitting in the comfort of my home flinging wild accusations about things I don't know all the facts about. I simply think it is disrespectful and disingenuous to call any President incompetent or to even pretend that we know what they deal with day in and day out.

Wild accusations.

Incompetent is incompetent. He failed at being President of the United States. You don't need any degree or to know the man that that last 8 years were a failure. Only those so far-removed from reality can say Cheney and he were successful. They polarized the country to the level of hateful rhetoric. They seemingly did little on the war on terror except that we have not had another attack but the terrorists are still out there. He failed when a natural disaster pummeled the gulf coast. And well the financial crisis at best was just dumb luck, at worst, his failure to properly attack the crisis before Obama took office, might have made it worse. He did nothing on the middle east. Russia is more Kremlin than Democratic. Iran is even closer to nuclear weaponization. He was not a fiscally responsible conservative.

The President is the executive of the executive branch of government. He appoints and oversees his administration. Congress only allocates money and can provide oversight. The president is the reason for the failure of his administration. Who do you want to blame...oh poor Bush he had it so hard.

Lincoln had it hard and he preserved the union. FDR managed the worst depression the world had ever seen and led US to a victorious position before he died. Competent men might not have been able to avoid the disasters Bush had to endure, but they might have tackled them differently.

Oh now it's just disrespectful to call any President incompetent. I don't pretend to know what he goes through, but I do know that he had opportunities to leave this country in a better place relative to the situation.

His failures might not be as criminal as Nixon but he's not going to be in the top 35 of US Presidents.

You guys cling on to whatever you need to, in order to feel better about Bush. His administration was a failure. He presided over that administration. Do the math.

Gotta love the wild-eyed "Bush caused divisiveness and hate! Cheney! Halliburton!" posts. I don't think it takes Sherlock Holmes to figure out where the hate really came from.

Nice array of silly examples there, too. Bush goes to war with Iraq more or less without the UN's blessing, and that's bad. Then he tries to handle Iran through the UN, and he's a failure for doing it that way. Worst depression the world has ever seen? Simply ignorant. I could go on, but sensible people have already had their chuckle at your expense.

[Jared]

"Simply ignorant. I could go on, but sensible people have already had their chuckle at your expense."

"No, his superior intellect lets him sleep at night."

"Whatever jrod...keep sipping that Bush-did-EVERYTHING-WRONG-and-it-is-ALL-HIS-FAULT koolaid"

"You guys cling on to whatever you need to, in order to feel better about Bush."

"JRod, you really don't know your asshole from your elbow...but boy, do you like to think that you do. And boy, oh boy, how you love to strut around with your peacock feathers spread out, head held high, looking down your beak at the pathetic humanoids who don't share your 'highbrow' opinions. The only person in this room who reeks of pathetic and comical at the moment is you, poindexter."

"Some people have the capacity to understand the complexity and thorniness of the issues a president faces... You are not one of those people."

So is this want we want the politics thread to be? Really?

And this isn't a rhetorical question.

[bdoughty]

So is this want we want the politics thread to be? Really?

Your posts are comical. You logical is pathetic, however.






* Done in jest of course, due to the duplicate want's and you did leave what I thought was the most offensive of the batch off your example (which is what I copy/pasted above). Sometimes certain posters do bring this upon themselves, Not saying that makes it right Jared but in the case of Jrod, the proof is in the pudding.

[macsomjrr]

"Simply ignorant. I could go on, but sensible people have already had their chuckle at your expense."

"No, his superior intellect lets him sleep at night."

"Whatever jrod...keep sipping that Bush-did-EVERYTHING-WRONG-and-it-is-ALL-HIS-FAULT koolaid"

"You guys cling on to whatever you need to, in order to feel better about Bush."

"JRod, you really don't know your asshole from your elbow...but boy, do you like to think that you do. And boy, oh boy, how you love to strut around with your peacock feathers spread out, head held high, looking down your beak at the pathetic humanoids who don't share your 'highbrow' opinions. The only person in this room who reeks of pathetic and comical at the moment is you, poindexter."

"Some people have the capacity to understand the complexity and thorniness of the issues a president faces... You are not one of those people."

So is this want we want the politics thread to be? Really?

And this isn't a rhetorical question.

I'd like to vote NO. Maybe we should have pro-Bush and anti-Bush Politics threads :):) Then perhaps we could focus our energies on the current President. The funny thing is I'm only half kidding...