Views of Obama Presidency

Stop the predictions of doom

It is simply amazing to me, reading all the comments about how President-elect Obama is going to ruin our country and how the country is going down the tubes because of his aspirations for us. The wisdom and prophetic nature of them all!

However, most likely these words of wisdom come from those who opposed Obama and wanted John McCain, and likely voted for the man who is now responsible for the “wonderful” shape of this country’s economy the last eight years. Perhaps Obama would do well to have these prophetic writers join him in the White House, so he will know what the future holds.

I submit that if we all had the negative attitude these writers have, with all the doomsday predictions for this country and its future, it would surely end up just like they say it will. Why not change that negativism into positive action, keep everyone’s attitude at an agreeable level, and wait and see what actually will transpire?

Harold Whittlesey
Blue Springs

I won’t support Obama

To all of you who just want everyone to come together and support Barack Obama, where were you when there was a call for everyone to come together and support President Bush? Instead, you have done everything you could to destroy the man.

Bush wanted a bipartisan solution to Social Security and immigration reform, among other things, but you’d have no part of anything he wanted to do.

As far as I’m concerned, I’ll not support anything Obama wants. I’m sure I’m not alone.

Rex Murphy
Wellsville, Kan.

Comments

[solomon]

Hey blackguard lover. I seriously doubt you are the 140 IQ you claim, (BTW, here I get to say I'm equipped like John Holmes) if you haven't noticed that history is my thing. I don't condemn or justify acts from history, I just call them like they are recorded. That fact that Germanic barbarians get you wet doesn't mean they had any redeeming virtues. The facts are that the traitorous Arminius betrayed his Roman allies and slaughtered men, women and children. You can say he did not do that, but that would just be par for the course for the Reggufibber. The fact that he is considered a German hero doesn't mean squat to an impartial student of history. There are many people who were murderous scum who are considered somebodies national hero.

The Germans had treaties with the Romans, and they turned on them and betrayed them. Find one bit of historical evidence that it did not happen.

Your problem is that you are a fan and not a thinker, and you just picked a very poor role model. Why don't you change your playdate name to Arafat?

[Arminius]

solomon:

"To say that the Germans had a right to do that means that the Iraqis fighting our occupation of their nation are fighting the good fight. You can't have it both ways."

You're extremely ignorant. The situation in Iraq today is not even close to being analogous to the situation with the Roman occupation of Germany.

There is a reason why Arminius is a hero of the German people. Have you ever read Tacitus' Annals? Of course, you haven't. Tacitus records that Arminius "fell by the treachery of his kinsmen." Further, "Assuredly he was the deliverer of Germany, one too who had defied Rome, not in her early rise, as other kings and generals, but in the hiehgt of her empire's glory, had fought indeed, indecisive battles, yet in war remained unconquered. He completed thirty-seven years of life, twelve years of power, and he is still the theme of song among barbarous nations, though of Greek historians, who admire only their own achievements, he is unknown, and to Romans not as famous as he should be, while we extol the past and are indifferent to our own times."

[THAT was my foot]

Mr. Murphy, that's fine if you don't want to support our President elect, but I'm certain he'll support you...

By the way, if you want to talk about tearing down just have a look at what talk radio does everyday in America... and has been for the last 12-15 years!!!

Enough sour grape whining!!!

[solomon]

one more thing Engineer, material gain is a goal of imperialism, but far from the major one. The toe hold we've gotten in the region, the setting up of a gov't in our sphere of influence and determining what neighbors are acceptable or not are huge factors.

[solomon]

I have no problem with Arminius the historical character, but if someone chooses to name themselves after him they need to accept him for what he was, a lying, treacherous murderer of women and children. To say that the Germans had a right to do that means that the Iraqis fighting our occupation of their nation are fighting the good fight. You can't have it both ways.

If I were to call myself Timur I'd have to accept that he was a cold blooded ruler who left pyramids of skulls outside the ruins of cities he conquered.

[Engineer]

solomon
The goal of imperialism is material gain by the "imperialistic" nation. I don't think we had that in mind. But you have it your way and I'll have it mine.
As to Arminius, one of my lines traces back to Woden, and Woden advises me that he was a good German and did what one should. I don't understand your complaints. You are a professed admirer of Timir, one of the bloodiest and cruelest monsters known to history. In his elder years he also had some very reprehensible habits concerning virgins. Between the two, I'll take Arminius as a human being any time.

[solomon]

To Arminius, who thinks choosing the name of a barbarous murderous traitorous individual is something a person of high IQ would do,

When is it just to betray your allies, kill them and their women and children, ignoring all treaties between you? At what point is callous deception and murder acceptable?

By the way, wikipedia isn't my thing, I learned about that piece of garbage you worship in high school back in the 60s

[solomon]

Reggufibber,

So, since you admire them their murderous backstabbing acts of violence are acceptable. By your poor use of logic the bombing of the Marines in Lebanon, all the car bombs in Iraq and every other treacherous act against the people in power or occupying a land is just.

The fact that Arminius was a big smelly barbarian might get you excited, he was just another loutish dishonest piece of crap who dined with the people he betrayed, and you can't dispute it.

[Arminius]

solomon:

You're quite ignorant. Arminius was a German. The Romans were on German soil and were taking advantage of the Germans through confiscatory tax rates. Arminius is a hero to the German people for essentially the same reason that our Founding Fathers are heroes (well, at least to non-liberals).

Again, read Tacitus to know about Arminius. Reading Wikipedia doesn't cut it, squirt.

[newdealer]

solomon - When arminius calls you an "airhead" or "ignorant," you probably should listen. Afterall, he does have an IQ of over 140. He's so smart, in fact, that he doesn't even have a computer. He plugs a wire in his ear and links his brain directly to the internet. That's why he's an expert on everything and is never,never wrong.

[solomon]

Reggufibber,

Many watchdog groups (American and non-american put the figure much higher, I don't know which number is more correct, the numerous reports of high numbers or the one you choose to believe. it really does not change the fact that, as I stated earlier, this is a war defined by the term "imperialism", and no one has come forth to dispute it.

As far as your backstabbing namesake, the fact that he is somehow heroic to you does not change the fact that the "battle of the Black Forest" was an ambush of the Romans by their allies, led by Arminius. To turn on your allies and kill them is not an act of valor. Every definition of the word "treachery" fits his actions. The tribes fell upon the column and slaughtered men women and children. To me that makes him a lying backstabbing tracherous piece of crap. You may see a deceitful liar as a hero, I'm not surprised.

[stone]

"You're obviously attributing deaths caused by fellow Iraqis and al Qaeda to our troops"

deaths by al Qaeda in IRAQ are, in effect, the fault of the US for invading Iraq and allowing Al Qaeda to form there, and are hence a result of the United States war in Iraq

Deaths by other Iraqi insurgents are also a result of us invading their country.

Whether or not more people would have died in this time period with our invasion vs. if Saddam was still in charge is debatable, but you can't dispute the fact that just because our military didn't shoot a person, doesn't mean that our military interference in their country didn't lead to the instability that is causing these deaths

[Arminius]

solomon:

"There have been confirmed reports that many mass graves in Iraq have been found, There have also been estimates that we have killed as many as half a million people,"

Good Lord, you are an airhead. Our troops have not killed 500,000 Iraqis. There is no credible source that reports that. You're obviously attributing deaths caused by fellow Iraqis and al Qaeda to our troops. Our troops are actually working to save Iraqis, so you're clearly a disgusting human being.

You're also quite ignorant about Arminius. Once you advance beyond comic books, you might check out Tacitus to learn more about him.

[solomon]

http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/Iraq/Iraqdeaths.html

I'm sure some will say this is an exaggeration and some will say it is a higher figure, but it is close to the figures of most estimates not put forth by our gov't.

[solomon]

Reggufibber,

I don't mind being called an airhead by someone who would use the name of a treacherous backstabber who turned on his allies and massacred soldiers, women and children.

There have been confirmed reports that many mass graves in Iraq have been found, There have also been estimates that we have killed as many as half a million people, (men women and children, most of whom were non-combatants) in the name of freedom. I'm sure that is seen as justifiable from the perspective of someone who would take the name of a slimeball proudly.

[Arminius]

solomon:

"Saddam was a brutal ruler but he did not kill Iraqis who disagreed with him in the numbers that we have killed Iraqis who resist and resent our occupation."

Only an extremely ignorant person could make such an asinine comment. After the invasion, there were mass graves undercovered that were filled with the bodies of hundreds of thousands of those that Saddam murdered.

You're a complete airhead.

[EL]

solomon;
Read before you type. I have always thought the Iraq war was unnecessary.

In 1941 Hitler had overwhelming popular support.
He never attracked the US, we attacked him.
Saddam Hussein attacked neighboring countries.
Occupied Germany had curfews, civilians who resisted were shot, the US forcibly installed a puppet government, limited foriegn relations, ran the economy.

The question for any war is whether it was worthwhile, if it prevented something worse.

[solomon]

Maybe some pol/sci major can weigh in, but there seems to be a simple standard for imperialism, and supposed virtue and intent don't come into play.

If your goals are to invade and topple a gov't and ruler you dislike, insist upon and organize the form of gov't you want, form a long term presence of military and gov't links, segregate their population into controllable segments, forcibly enforce curfews, kill the native citizens who resist your occupation, determine what relations they can have with their neighbors and manage their economy that fits the definition of imperialism.

[solomon]

EL,

Completely different actions EL. How can you compare completely different actions? Did we "liberate" Germany from a gov't that the people endorsed in huge #s or did we "defeat" a nation that had declared war on their neighbors and us? What we've done in Iraq is not the same thing.

And since it appears that you are for this imperialist occupation, please define it in terms that dispute what I'm calling it.

That fact that it is us doing it doesn't mean we get to redefine the word "imperialist"

[EL]

solomon;

Do youy also have a problem with the US liberation and imperial occupation of Germany and Italy?

[solomon]

Kee is a bit like Mark R isn't he? I love it when these guys say we liberated Iraq. Iraq had a dictator, but the people were not slaves. There were employment opportunities, a working economy and thriving industry. Saddam was a brutal ruler but he did not kill Iraqis who disagreed with him in the numbers that we have killed Iraqis who resist and resent our occupation. And the killed or captured 10s of thousands who want to destroy this nation, there is no evidence that there are great numbers of Iraqis who ever wanted to destroy this nation. If I recall Saddam was very chummy with our CIA and defense dept for years, until he wanted his way in his region.

Saddam needed to go,(what ever happened to good old assassination?) but this claim of liberating a country that we are engaging in an imperialist occupation is an incorrect use of the word.

[Kee]

With all due respect to your suggestion to do more research, can you tell me exactly how increasing the supply of oil by developing our own reserves will not reduce our costs?

By denying oil producers massive reserves offshore and in the Artic we are in fact assuring ourselves of the same spikes we just went through. You point out that "speculators" drove the price up by anticipating demand. How will these speculators price the product when demand is decreased by increased supply?

Ten years ago Pres. Clinton vetoed drilling in ANWR, saying it would take ten years to get to market anyway. It is time we act to get our own supply of oil.

[Casady]

Kee, you clearly do not have an understanding on economic issues and are merely regurgitating Rush talking points. I suggest you dig a little deeper into the issues and do your own thinking on the matter. Oil rose to $147 bbl for the same reasons it has falled to $49 bbl; speculation based on demand forecasts and the value of the dollar. One could just as easily blame the devalued dollar on the trade policies of the Bush Administration but a little research will indicate it is a little more complicated than that. I suggest you do a little research of your own.

[Jim]

It appears Mark Robertson has found a soulmate in Kee.

[Kee]

The current financial times are due to two huge factors. $4.00 a gallon gasoline that crippled the auto, marine, airline indutstries; as well as harming virtually every other segment of our economy, many business's have not recovered yet.

Secondly the huge sub prime mortgage market mess, precipitated by the failure of Fnnie and Freddie.

These problems were caused by the party that prevented oil companies from developing our own oil reserves, and who aided and abetted the fraud going on in the mortgage market.

Neither of these issues were created by President Bush.

That "pointless war" has liberated 19 million people and killed and captured tens of thousands or terrorists bent on destroying this country.

[JayhawkinMO]

Rex ought to check out Bush's approval rating of 20+%. He doesn't enjoy that number just because of liberals and independents... I was generally in favor of any proposal on immigration reform that included Bush's guest worker program, resident alien status, keeping families together and better border control. So what's the fuss, Rex? Regardless, you're one right-winger living in a red state with only 5 electoral votes. No big deal...

[solomon]

President Bush is not the President of the people who believe in him, he is the President of every American citizen. Come January President Obama will be the President not of his followers, but every American citizen. If you don't like it vote him out in 2012, but you owe it to your country to stop the stupid personal attacks and judge the man on what he does. Presidents Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, Carter and all the way back to Washington have had successes and failures, and it is your responsibility as Americans to stand behind them and hope for the best.

No matter how much you bitch and moan, this guy is going to do what he's gonna do, just like the present guy. Considering we're in financial trouble, engaged in a war that cost more to pursue than it does to run some countries, facing a bailout or BK of one of our largest industries, in the midst of a housing and credit crisis and seeing record unemployment it seems whatever we've been doing the last few decades has us here.

[Marctnts]

"I will grant this President the exact same amount of respect that the far left gave President Bush after his election."

But mom, Timmy hit me first...

One question. What did you think of those who didn't give Bush the level of respect you thought he deserved? Other than the fact that it's not "your guy" we're talking about, what else has changed about the situation?

[repete]

Bush and his cronies were as unilateral as any politician I've seen. My dislike for the guy in 2000 was based 100% on his expressed ideas. Once elected, my disapproval of Bush was based solely on his enacted policies. I was not closed minded to liking the guy. He just left me no other choice.

Rex should know better than to use words like "never". He should also have more wisdom than to say he'll never support Obama because so many people didn't support Bush. What a childish non sequitur.

[EL]

viet-vet;

How is Obama any less partisan than Bush?
Has he proposed one program that is right of center?

[viet-vet1970]

"Bush wanted a bipartisan solution to ..."

Actually Rex, Bush SAID he wanted bipartisan solutions to SS and immigration reform. But the solutions he advocated were so far to the right that no thinking moderate could support them, much less liberals.

Bush did the same thing when he was governor of Texas. But in Bush-think, bipartisan means both parties doing things his way.

[Kee]

I will grant this President the exact same amount of respect that the far left gave President Bush after his election.

[EL]

No thinking person supports a person or a party but will support or oppose each policy on its own merits.

I supported president Bush when he was right and opposed him when he was wrong.

I will support president Obama when he is reight and oppose him when he is wrong.

[Marctnts]

"As far as I’m concerned, I’ll not support anything Obama wants. I’m sure I’m not alone."

"Timmy hit me first" is never a good rationale for a poor course of action. Let the man actually take the office, and judge him on the actions of his presidency and not the "pie-in-the-sky" campaign promises or attitudes of his supporters.