“That means raising the minimum wage, expanding eligibility for overtime pay and respecting the rights of all workers to organize. To make the dream true again, we must expand ? and not reduce ? Social Security benefits.”
-Martin O’Malley
I would say he is a technocrat. I hadn’t heard the term before, but it seems to fit him well I think.
Personally, I’m hoping that Mr. Obama gets two more terms. It just doesn’t seem fair that Franklin Roosevelt(a white man) was able to serve four terms*, and the first African American(ish) President will be kicked out after two.
*Other white men were allowed to seek more than two terms.
[quote]NickViar wrote:
Personally, I’m hoping that Mr. Obama gets two more terms. It just doesn’t seem fair that Franklin Roosevelt(a white man) was able to serve four terms*, and the first African American(ish) President will be kicked out after two.
*Other white men were allowed to seek more than two terms. [/quote]
Can we have one conversation where the hyperbole police don’t need to be called?
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]NickViar wrote:
Personally, I’m hoping that Mr. Obama gets two more terms. It just doesn’t seem fair that Franklin Roosevelt(a white man) was able to serve four terms*, and the first African American(ish) President will be kicked out after two.
*Other white men were allowed to seek more than two terms. [/quote]
Can we have one conversation where the hyperbole police don’t need to be called? [/quote]
Call them if you wish, but they will find nothing worthy of investigation.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
he can at least structure a complete sentence which is more than I can say for his bafoon of a brother, [/quote]
It’s funny you say this… I’m not a big 43 fan, but I would bet a mortgage payment his reading list makes looks yours look like a toddler’s book shelf.
I’m going out on a limb and assume you’ve never accomplished damn near anything close to that which he has…
But you know, your masters tell you to call him stupid, so you do. [/quote]
What do you think he would have accomplished if it wasn’t given to him under a Christmas tree?
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]NickViar wrote:
Personally, I’m hoping that Mr. Obama gets two more terms. It just doesn’t seem fair that Franklin Roosevelt(a white man) was able to serve four terms*, and the first African American(ish) President will be kicked out after two.
*Other white men were allowed to seek more than two terms. [/quote]
Can we have one conversation where the hyperbole police don’t need to be called? [/quote]
Call them if you wish, but they will find nothing worthy of investigation.[/quote]
On the contrary, they will immediately bag you for egregious exaggeration. Roosevelt was elected four times, but he died shortly into his fourth term. Ergo, was unable to serve four terms, which is, like, the opposite of what you said.
Racist!
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I’m going out on a limb and assume you’ve never accomplished damn near anything close to that which he has…
[/quote]
I’m currently reading a book written by 43 about 41. That in and of itself is an accomplishment most will never achieve.
I’m a fan of 43. I don’t agree with all his decisions, but I’ve always admired him. [/quote]
I think more and more people are coming around to this view. The claim that he was a semi-literate “baffoon” aas nonsense. In another anecdote, I believe he and Karl Rove (maybe?) had a standing challenge to read a book a week - and that was while he was in office.
I disagree with many things Bush did and believed - the prosecution of the Iraq war, the near theological belief in the magic of supply-side economics, just to hit the big ones - and I thinj he will go down in history as a middling president, but he is a decent man who suffered unfair and idiotic slanders during his term.[/quote]
Yep, I am firmly in this camp. He did a lot of things I was not a fan of, and a couple I thought were just terrible decisions. But…decent men are hard enough to come by in politics, and it always rankled how he was just murdered in the court of media/social media/public opinion with slanderous comments for his lack of public speaking acumen (although I seem to recall that he was not that bad in the run up to the 2000 election. Perhaps the laser focus wasn’t turned on him just yet).
At the end of the day, I can really hate someone’s politics but if they’re a decent person I don’t hate THEM, and they have my respect even if I think they’re crazy. I think Reagan and Tip O’Neill had a relationship like that, which I really wish we could go back towards.
And I do believe that book challenge was real. We should never confuse public speaking ability with actual ‘smarts’.
On topic, I’m still too much up in the air on this upcoming election. It pains me to say it, but right now I’m giving to Hillary on the edge.
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
Who ultimately cares about Jeb being President, he can at least structure a complete sentence which is more than I can say for his bafoon of a brother, but nothing of substance will change. [/quote]
Is this the sentence with which you have chosen to attack another’s ability to properly communicate?[/quote]
As if a little misspelling can compare to a man who is supposed to lead a country. Here is an example of this buffoon Best of the Bushisms - YouTube Your retarded hero on full retard display.
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]NickViar wrote:
Personally, I’m hoping that Mr. Obama gets two more terms. It just doesn’t seem fair that Franklin Roosevelt(a white man) was able to serve four terms*, and the first African American(ish) President will be kicked out after two.
*Other white men were allowed to seek more than two terms. [/quote]
Can we have one conversation where the hyperbole police don’t need to be called? [/quote]
Call them if you wish, but they will find nothing worthy of investigation.[/quote]
I’d rather not.
[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
he can at least structure a complete sentence which is more than I can say for his bafoon of a brother, [/quote]
It’s funny you say this… I’m not a big 43 fan, but I would bet a mortgage payment his reading list makes looks yours look like a toddler’s book shelf.
I’m going out on a limb and assume you’ve never accomplished damn near anything close to that which he has…
But you know, your masters tell you to call him stupid, so you do. [/quote]
What do you think he would have accomplished if it wasn’t given to him under a Christmas tree?
[/quote]
I’m sure he’d be advocating for communism on a weight lifting board much like yourself…
Aragorn,
Great post, and completely agreed. Bush was never that bad of a public speaker. He wasn’t great, either. His biggest problem was that he wasn’t great extemporaneously when a political answer was needed. I think he struggled with not saying what was exactly on his mind.
And I completely agree re: decency. That’s the problem with True Believer Politics - people who disagree with you are never just political opponents, they are always enemies who are one step away from destroying the xountry. We’ve been in a long run of that, whether it’s Tea Partiers or Obamabots, and it’s time to move on.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]NickViar wrote:
Personally, I’m hoping that Mr. Obama gets two more terms. It just doesn’t seem fair that Franklin Roosevelt(a white man) was able to serve four terms*, and the first African American(ish) President will be kicked out after two.
*Other white men were allowed to seek more than two terms. [/quote]
Can we have one conversation where the hyperbole police don’t need to be called? [/quote]
Call them if you wish, but they will find nothing worthy of investigation.[/quote]
On the contrary, they will immediately bag you for egregious exaggeration. Roosevelt was elected four times, but he died shortly into his fourth term. Ergo, was unable to serve four terms, which is, like, the opposite of what you said.
Racist!
;)[/quote]
Good point. Of course, that brings up another interesting question: Would it be racist if an African American(ish) President was to run in and win four elections, and then actually serve all of them without dying?
(FWIW, I say that it would certainly not be racist, especially when all of the African American(ish) President’s marionettists are white.)
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
I’m reading 41, a personal account of the life of George H.W. Bush written by George W. Bush, and a handful of things have really hammered this sentiment home. For example, one of the first things 43 says is something along the lines of, “someone will one day write an objective and impartial history about my father. This book will be neither.” That’s the type of thing a decent stand-up guy would say.
[/quote]
To be fair, imagine what would happen if he didn’t write that passage.
You can never be objective when you’re writing about your family members, especially if it’s your father. Depending on your PoV, him writing that is either him playing potential damage control to give his account some credibility, or him being a decent, honest man.
In any case, the views of most presidents mellow out and become more objective as time passes. Truman was reviled in his days, but now is considered a strong president who generally did the right thing.
I really don’t like a lot of things Bush 43 enacted in his presidency, but I think his personality is one of an honest, genuine man who doesn’t really wish anyone harm.
He was a victim of the times. 9/11 fundamentally influenced his presidency, as most great events influence an individual’s presidency and dictates what they do.
[quote]magick wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
I’m reading 41, a personal account of the life of George H.W. Bush written by George W. Bush, and a handful of things have really hammered this sentiment home. For example, one of the first things 43 says is something along the lines of, “someone will one day write an objective and impartial history about my father. This book will be neither.” That’s the type of thing a decent stand-up guy would say.
[/quote]
To be fair, imagine what would happen if he didn’t write that passage. [/quote]
He didn’t have to write it. I think anyone with any common sense understood the book was not going to be objective. Ask yourself this though, if any other President, Congressman, official, etc… was writing a similar book would they be upfront about their bias?
My answer would be, “I doubt many would.”
[quote]
You can never be objective when you’re writing about your family members, especially if it’s your father. Depending on your PoV, him writing that is either him playing potential damage control to give his account some credibility, or him being a decent, honest man. [/quote]
Sure, it was just one example though.
[quote]
He was a victim of the times. 9/11 fundamentally influenced his presidency, as most great events influence an individual’s presidency and dictates what they do.[/quote]
Ya, there is no telling what kind of Presidency he would of been had 9/11 not occurred. It certainly shaped his 2 terms and some of Obama’s as well. He talks about it briefly in Decision Points if memory serves. I remember he wanted to do more with education.
Putting aside the reality of actually getting elected, what is the consensus on Jeb’s decision-making skills? Would he, hypothetically, be a better or worse president than 43?
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
he can at least structure a complete sentence which is more than I can say for his bafoon of a brother, [/quote]
It’s funny you say this… I’m not a big 43 fan, but I would bet a mortgage payment his reading list makes looks yours look like a toddler’s book shelf.
I’m going out on a limb and assume you’ve never accomplished damn near anything close to that which he has…
But you know, your masters tell you to call him stupid, so you do. [/quote]
What do you think he would have accomplished if it wasn’t given to him under a Christmas tree?
[/quote]
I’m sure he’d be advocating for communism on a weight lifting board much like yourself…
Don’t have to be told by anyone he is an idiot. Just watch him speak. And who is advocating for communism? The 2 parties are mere administrators for the elite. They are non-responsive to the peoples needs. So if Bush is elected or Clinton it really doesn’t make a difference.
[/quote]
" I think he struggled with not saying what was exactly on his mind." Because he only possessed a vocabulary of a 5th grader. Seriously he has to be the stupidest President ever. A total embarrassment! But you will make any excuse to deny it. Because he is a Republican.
[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
" I think he struggled with not saying what was exactly on his mind." Because he only possessed a vocabulary of a 5th grader. Seriously he has to be the stupidest President ever. A total embarrassment! But you will make any excuse to deny it. Because he is a Republican.[/quote]
Bravo, your troll skills have not diminished one bit. No matter how hard I try I just can’t ignore your stupid ass posts. It’s like a car accident or a train wreck. You just have to look.
You’re a fucking idiot and it has zero to do with your party affiliation.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Ya, there is no telling what kind of Presidency he would of been had 9/11 not occurred. It certainly shaped his 2 terms and some of Obama’s as well. He talks about it briefly in Decision Points if memory serves. I remember he wanted to do more with education. [/quote]
That’s the great irony with terrorist attacks against the U.S.
Unless you go and literally gut the U.S. and bring it to its knees, you’ll only be pissing people off and making them actually care about you.
Imagine if Al-Qaeda never bothered to launch a serious attack against the U.S. Afghanistan would still be an Al-Qaeda haven and OBL would still be alive. The U.S. public wouldn’t care two shits about OBL and the U.S. foreign department wouldn’t deem it important to take him out unless he did something like… 9/11…
(Sorry for off-topic… It’s a problem with me, it appears.)
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Aragorn,
Great post, and completely agreed. Bush was never that bad of a public speaker. He wasn’t great, either. His biggest problem was that he wasn’t great extemporaneously when a political answer was needed. I think he struggled with not saying what was exactly on his mind.
And I completely agree re: decency. That’s the problem with True Believer Politics - people who disagree with you are never just political opponents, they are always enemies who are one step away from destroying the xountry. We’ve been in a long run of that, whether it’s Tea Partiers or Obamabots, and it’s time to move on. [/quote]
Thank you kindly sir! I do very much believe that his greatest speaking weakness was extemporaneous politics. I think that is generally one of the shortcomings of decent people: the relative inability to disguise, semantically joust, and/or maneuver in the face of something they believe. Whether they believe it rightly or wrongly–or even whether what they believe is true or not–is generally immaterial to their handicap in dissimulation. As I alluded to elsewhere, this is one primary reason I would never have made a good debater in high school or college, and certainly never a good lawyer.
Decency is something I’ve longed for in the political arena ever since Clinton. I became politically aware during his first term, but having mined the history of the last few Presidents I really think it started to dive then. And then it took on a new level with the 2000 chad bitterness and just exponentially increased from there.
The name escapes me at the moment but one of the great statesmen of centuries past has been recorded as saying “I’ve never dissolved a friendship over a political opinion” (roughly paraphrased). I think that we are in a new and significantly lower quality era of political life. To be sure there have always been fights both figuratively and literally over political stances, and to be sure there have always been extremists. It may be my relative young age but I see this as much more pervasive now. True Believerism to be sure.