२४ फेब्रुवारी, २०११
Remember when Sarah Palin was asked "What is the Bush Doctrine?"
It was a painful, embarrassing episode for her. Here's a question for producing new gotcha moments for selected politicians: What is the Obama Doctrine?
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
२४२ टिप्पण्या:
«सर्वात जुने ‹थोडे जुने 242 पैकी 201 – 242will bring his total time spent at Camp David to all or part of 487 days.
Yes, and of course silly, ignorant people like you say Camp David is "vacation"
But you're a moron.
Jay - Bush signed the bill, he didn't veto it...and it wasn't just the Democrats who "wrote the bill"...are you a fucking idiot??
Did you attend high school?
Ever take a political science or history course?
Good lord...
Do the math...if you know how.
There is no "math" to "do" dipshit.
Camp David is not "vacation"
Being at Crawford doesn't necessarily mean "vacation"
Tell us stupid, how many trips to Hawaii did Bush take like Obama recently did?
Do the math...
.and it wasn't just the Democrats who "wrote the bill"...are you a fucking idiot??
Which Republicans wrote it?
Name 5, dumbass.
Cedarford, you overlooked that Japan attacked US, not the third Reich.
Cedarford, you overlooked that Japan attacked US, not the third Reich.
Ever take a political science or history course?
Hysterical.
I'm not the one posting that the last thing little Georgie did was sign the 800 billion dollar bank bailout bill.
As if it means something.
Jay - So Bush signing the bill means nothing?
I'll pass that along.
Duh.
Jay - Are you over or under twelve years old?
The recession began in December of 1007.
1007 was a long time ago.
But yes, the Democrats had an large congressional majority in Dec 2007 which included Barack Obama.
As an additional point of fact, you can't name a single policy the Republicans proposed or enacted that led to a "collapsed economy."
Provide evidence that liberals want us to "lose."
Here's your evidence.
Jay - So Bush signing the bill means nothing?
You can't articulate what it means.
You tried to use the legislation in question (32% of the Senate Republicans voted against it) to illustrate something.
You can't articulate said something. Mainly because you're incoherent.
Jay - Are you over or under twelve years old?
So says the 25 year old know it all...
Jay - So Bush signing the bill means nothing?
Er, a majority of house republicans voted against this Democratic bill.
Jeremy said...
Jay - Are you over or under twelve years old?
Note this is the response when pressed on your silly assertions and dipshit "logic"
Shocking, I know...
"its a prize for making America weaker"
Provide evidence that liberals want us to "lose."
Welcome to Earth. Please enjoy your stay.
Otherwise, shove it.
After you.
I realized while reading Jeremy's comments on Bush 2's performance in office that Jeremy is on target when he says that Bush 2 intentionally ignored the economics crisis of severe job loses to China and India being hidden under an artificial real estate bubble that he and the Dems conspired together to create after the Dot Com Bubble had deflated...the Dems did it to grab loot and Bush 2 did it to finance his war in Iraq. End result is that the USA is on life support, and the crisis loving Dems are trying to double down on looting using Government Credit. Thanks for reminding us Jeremy that we should never again elect a Bush or a Bush Family operative.
"the Obama Doctrine which is to appease dictators"
By letting them get overthrown? I don't get it.
______________________________
me either? That's a stretch by any truthful measurement.
"the Obama Doctrine which is to appease dictators"
By letting them get overthrown? I don't get it.
__________________________________
Me either?
That's a stretch by any truthful measurement.
Obama has opposed the dictators on the side of the PEOPLE....the Republicans have been bitching about it, too.
Truthfully, Obama is just never going to do anything right for you people. He's black, PERIOD.
That's what this is about.
$arah, Rush, Beck and Althouse all have a DISTAIN for the black guy in the white house.
An irrational disdain.
Libtard: Truthfully, Obama is just never going to do anything right for you people. He's black, PERIOD.
Thats right. Paper over the incompetence of the Diversity Hire by claiming his critics are racists.
Obama doctrine:
Spread the wealth through Obamacare, cap and trade, overspending, pigford, UN, etc.
"Truthfully, Obama is just never going to do anything right for you people. He's black, PERIOD."
If I was a racist, his blackness would still only explain half his screw ups.
I'm afraid the problem is more than skin deep.
The Obama Doctrine:
Last year, right around the time Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi called Obama “our son,” Obama earmarked $400,000 for two Libyan charities. The money was divided between two foundations run by Gaddafi’s children; Gaddafi International Charity and Development Foundation, run by his son Saif, and Wa Attassimou, run by his daughter Aicha. What noble causes did our tax dollars potentially help support thanks to Obama’s generosity?
Funding of the ship Amalthea: The Amalthea sailed to Israel with the intent of breaking the Israeli blockade on Hamas. It carried aid for a pseudo humanitarian crisis and supporters who were said to be “keen on expressing solidarity with the Palestinian people in the plight amidst the siege imposed on Gaza.” The ship was funded by Saif Gaddafi’s charity, Gaddafi International Charity and Development Association.
No, we had no business fighting on European soil. We could easily have stayed out of both WWI and II-E.
I'd hate to live in your world.
Bush signed the bill because it's the solution that Congress came up with and Bush was a lame duck, in no position to push an alternative (not saying he *had* one, but even if he had).
Obama then compounded that like an athlete with roid rage.
Now... suggesting that those of us who support Bush simply *must* support that initial stimulous bill is contrary to both reason and evidence. In fact, I don't know anyone who is inconsistent in opposing the notion of stimulous.
The inconsistency, flagrant inconsistency, is on the part of anyone arguing that Bush was *wrong* but somehow Obama is *right*. And since I don't believe Jeremy believes that Obama was wrong, it's hypocritical of him to be critical of Bush.
It just occurred to me that there is a similarity in the end of the two Bush presidencies. Both Bushes had an end of term emergency they had to respond to. Mogadishu, and the economic/housing crash. Both Bushes enacted an emergency stop-gap. Both refused to commit the country to a policy they wouldn't be around to enact as president.
And both victorious Democrat presidential candidates took those emergency stop-gap measures and continued them without a coherent policy or active rethinking of the problem or what the proper solution ought to be.
@Deo
"That's what this is about.
$arah, Rush, Beck and Althouse all have a DISTAIN for the black guy in the white house.
An irrational disdain."
Really? IRRATIONAL (disdain)?
Without recounting all of the stupid quotes from Zero, his associations with black racists, white terrorists, Chicago criminals, etc etc etc.
I suppose you are saying that everyone that isn't drinking the kool-aid is imagining everything.
We are imagining the entire world laughing at us because only you and your ilk understand the nuance of this guy? Sure.
News flash - most people I know are honest, hard-working family types. Never asked for a handout. If they needed help, they went to their family first. Not the government. None of them is down with Zero, regardless of his color that you apparently are hung up on. Just because he's black, doesn't mean he hung the fucking moon in the sky - oh, by the way, tell Sheila Jackson Lee that the fucking US flag is on the moon and not on Mars.
Liberals - throwing America under the bus, undercutting morals, and being a general buzzkill for over 100 years.
"That's a stretch by any truthful measurement.
Obama has opposed the dictators on the side of the PEOPLE....the Republicans have been bitching about it, too."
This is true. Obama can be counted on to support dictators who are the right sort of dictators, the sort that American liberals swoon over because they have the proper politics and make the right noises about The People. He supported Chavez's toady Zelaya despite Zelaya's defiance of his own country's constitution and blatant evidence that he had rigged his election, and Obama said it was about the will of The People. And yes, Republicans bitch about this.
"Truthfully, Obama is just never going to do anything right for you people. He's black, PERIOD."
Right, because there really isn't any reason that a conservative would disagree with a liberal if they were both white.
That's why it never happened before.
Sarah, Rush, Beck and Althouse all have a DISTAIN for the black guy in the white house.
One of the quickest ways to alienate the white swing voters Obama desperately needs is to throw around unsubstantiated charges of racism.
So by all means -- carry on. :)
I don't have the same take on that as you, Althouse. It turns out that Palin was very much exonerated for that exchange. The question was vague. There were legitimate doubts as to what the questioner meant by the "Bush Doctrine". There were a few.
One of Palin's weaknesses is an inability to think on her feet when under pressure. She was wound up tight as a drum in the Couric interview, and Couric knew it and took advantage.
Even if we remove the Bush-Doctrine question, Couric had Palin beat. Sarah's demeanor reflected a woman on the defensive. She was foolish to step into the lion's den.
Same with Gibson, but with him the built-in bias, and Charlie's self-superiority and elitist condescension - were much more obvious.
Pardon my incivility, but the definition of 'The Obama
Doctrine" is:
Talk softly, but wield a small dick.
John Reece
According to CBS News White House Correspondent Mark Knoller -
I hear CBS has a memo from an unimpeachable source...
It seems a little bit unfair to even pose this question, because the Bush doctrine was specific to foreign policy and grew largely out of unique circumstances that were (at least partially) exogenous. President Obama has primarily dealt with the same foreign policy issues and has not adopted a markedly different approach. Similarly, one could not easily identify a coherent "Clinton Doctrine," even though President Clinton served for two full (and relatively eventful) terms. But this is not necessarily due to a lack of clarity on his part, but rather due to the absence of a major foreign policy challenge around which to construct a coherent "doctrine."
We know we're bad, but gosh darnit we just want everyone to like us (except Israel).
wv.: pheollis--- city of phallics
John,
Perhaps it will occur to you that public pronouncements do not always contain the true motivations. If lend-lease were the trigger there is no reason the declaration would wait until 1941. It was a justification for public relations.
As I said, Hitler declared war on us expecting the Japanese to declare war on the Soviets in return. Had we not engaged in lend-lease we still would have ended up in the war, only allied with a much weakened Britain.
The Obama doctrine is to proclaim "it" as unacceptable and then hide under the bed.
Jeremy: "I asked you what makes you think we have the right to anything of the kind and you have no answer...because we don't have the right."
Show me where you asked me that question. You asked me what I would do were I in charge and I told you.
You should lay off the weed when you are "thinking"
Hoosier Daddy, If you knew any history you would know Germany declared war on US after we declared war on Japan. If you knew any economic history you would know that selling war material to allies being in 1938 rebooted economy, developed the the Arsenal of Democracy and got the US out of Great Depression.
I'm pretty confident that I have forgotten more history than you pretend to know.
I'm also confident that I have a better grasp of reading comprehension than you do as well.
As I said, Hitler declared war on us expecting the Japanese to declare war on the Soviets in return.
Curious as Japan had signed a Neutrality Pact with the Soviets in 1939. Then again Hitler wasn't always thinking clearly and I would argue his hopes were far fetched.
The existence of a doctrine sure did Bush and the world a lot of good. Nothing like self-imposed ideological rigidity to cope with a rapidly changing world.
Yep, you Commies sure do have it all figured out! Once you find out it doesn't work even when the whole world is Communist, as you promised, you'll just move on to the Solar System.
The existence of a doctrine sure did Bush and the world a lot of good. Nothing like self-imposed ideological rigidity to cope with a rapidly changing world.
Yep, you Commies sure do have it all figured out! Once you find out it doesn't work even "when the whole world is Communist", you'll just move on to Communizing the remaining Solar System.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा