Veepstakes

[HuskerNation1]

 

However, so much can be accomplished by simply being a good representative and gaining favor around the world for what we want to accomplish.

This is a pretty succinct description of the Bill Clinton presidency. He wasn't much of a leader, but he had a knack for making people feel good.

 

 

Wow, I have to actually defend Bill Clinton on this topic, which I don't do often. I personally find the guy an immoral piece of crap, but he is 1000 times a better leader than Obama ever could be. In 1994 after the Republican Revolution, Clinton has the self awareness to look internally and declare the era of big govt was over. He also reached out to seek compromise and find middle ground, something Obama again refuses to do. He also helped mobilize a Democratic coalition after 12 years of GOP rule. Like Obama, I think his biggest failures as a POTUS were gutting our intelligence community and not taking the terror threat seriously enough.

[TGHusker]

 

 

However, so much can be accomplished by simply being a good representative and gaining favor around the world for what we want to accomplish.

This is a pretty succinct description of the Bill Clinton presidency. He wasn't much of a leader, but he had a knack for making people feel good.

 

 

Wow, I have to actually defend Bill Clinton on this topic, which I don't do often. I personally find the guy an immoral piece of crap, but he is 1000 times a better leader than Obama ever could be. In 1994 after the Republican Revolution, Clinton has the self awareness to look internally and declare the era of big govt was over. He also reached out to seek compromise and find middle ground, something Obama again refuses to do. He also helped mobilize a Democratic coalition after 12 years of GOP rule. Like Obama, I think his biggest failures as a POTUS were gutting our intelligence community and not taking the terror threat seriously enough.

 

 

agree!

[Guy Chamberlin]

 

 

However, so much can be accomplished by simply being a good representative and gaining favor around the world for what we want to accomplish.

This is a pretty succinct description of the Bill Clinton presidency. He wasn't much of a leader, but he had a knack for making people feel good.

 

 

Wow, I have to actually defend Bill Clinton on this topic, which I don't do often. I personally find the guy an immoral piece of crap, but he is 1000 times a better leader than Obama ever could be. In 1994 after the Republican Revolution, Clinton has the self awareness to look internally and declare the era of big govt was over. He also reached out to seek compromise and find middle ground, something Obama again refuses to do. He also helped mobilize a Democratic coalition after 12 years of GOP rule. Like Obama, I think his biggest failures as a POTUS were gutting our intelligence community and not taking the terror threat seriously enough.

 

 

In any other era, Obama would be considered a moderate Republican.

 

Ronald Reagan pushed through more big government social engineering than Obama has. Some people conveniently forget that.

 

And it is utterly ludicrous to blame Obama for not seeking middle ground and compromise given the blanket Republican obstructionism the Tea Party has foisted on the party.

 

With both Trump and Sanders benefitting from the "throw the bums out" sentiment, some forget just how responsible Tea Party obstructionists are for making the system even more dysfunctional and dislikable.

 

They are also responsible for a lot of the anti-Obama memes that get repeated until people think they're true. Most of them aren't.

 

As for your last statement: it was the Bush administration that ignored the memo "bin Laden determined to strike in U.S." that included a specific warning about al Queda hijacking a commercial airliner, because Cheney and others did not want to accept any intelligence from the outgoing Clinton appointees.

 

The Obama administration has been far more accurate and successful in targeting and killing high level terrorists than their predecessors.

 

I know Fox News likes to freak people out because Obama avoids painting Islamic Terrorists with a broad brush, but as any student of terrorism knows, that's what ISIS wants him to do. The very purpose and only tool of terrorists is to get their much larger adversary to over-react.

[HuskerNation1]

 

 

 

However, so much can be accomplished by simply being a good representative and gaining favor around the world for what we want to accomplish.

This is a pretty succinct description of the Bill Clinton presidency. He wasn't much of a leader, but he had a knack for making people feel good.

 

 

Wow, I have to actually defend Bill Clinton on this topic, which I don't do often. I personally find the guy an immoral piece of crap, but he is 1000 times a better leader than Obama ever could be. In 1994 after the Republican Revolution, Clinton has the self awareness to look internally and declare the era of big govt was over. He also reached out to seek compromise and find middle ground, something Obama again refuses to do. He also helped mobilize a Democratic coalition after 12 years of GOP rule. Like Obama, I think his biggest failures as a POTUS were gutting our intelligence community and not taking the terror threat seriously enough.

 

 

In any other era, Obama would be considered a moderate Republican.

 

Ronald Reagan pushed through more big government social engineering than Obama has. Some people conveniently forget that.

 

And it is utterly ludicrous to blame Obama for not seeking middle ground and compromise given the blanket Republican obstructionism the Tea Party has foisted on the party.

 

With both Trump and Sanders benefitting from the "throw the bums out" sentiment, some forget just how responsible Tea Party obstructionists are for making the system even more dysfunctional and dislikable.

 

They are also responsible for a lot of the anti-Obama memes that get repeated until people think they're true. Most of them aren't.

 

As for your last statement: it was the Bush administration that ignored the memo "bin Laden determined to strike in U.S." that included a specific warning about al Queda hijacking a commercial airliner, because Cheney and others did not want to accept any intelligence from the outgoing Clinton appointees.

 

The Obama administration has been far more accurate and successful in targeting and killing high level terrorists than their predecessors.

 

I know Fox News likes to freak people out because Obama avoids painting Islamic Terrorists with a broad brush, but as any student of terrorism knows, that's what ISIS wants him to do. The very purpose and only tool of terrorists is to get their much larger adversary to over-react.

 

 

Wow, I think the part in bold has to be the most laughable statement I've ever seen in this forum. Are you drinking the liberal media kool-aid or something? I get that Fox leans to the right and don't subscribe to everything they claim, but Obama has been the most left POTUS in the past 50 years. I guess if you think that makes him a moderate Republican, so be it. That would be like me arguing that Bush 43 is a mainstream Democrat because he (like LBJ in the 60s) started an unpopular war and expanded Medicare Part D.

As for terrorism, we are less safe as a country from terrorists, and the number of terror attacks at home and abroad have grown immensely under Obama's watch. As I've pointed out repeatedly, Obama's own CIA director recently stated that ISIS was decimated when Bush left office and has grown by 4400% under Obama's watch. His legacy will be failing to take the threat of terrorism seriously and leaving this country vulnerable during and well after his time in office.

[knapplc]

The Tea Party didn't exist when Obama took office. It's largely a reaction to the affront of America electing a Black man president.

[HuskerShark]

Just throwing this out there... Bin Laden didn't attack the world trade centers or Pentagon.

[mrandyk]

Just throwing this out there... Bin Laden didn't attack the world trade centers or Pentagon.

Stick to selling Avon.

[HuskerShark]

 

 

Just throwing this out there... Bin Laden didn't attack the world trade centers or Pentagon.

Stick to selling Avon.

That's pretty called for huh...

[funhusker]

Just throwing this out there... Bin Laden didn't attack the world trade centers or Pentagon.

What do you mean by this?

 

Of course, he didn't "personally" attack them. The people who "attacked" on 9/11 all died as a result of the attacks. If that is your position, then I will assume you believe suicide-bombings should not be investigated and justice pursued because the attacker is already dead?

 

Or am I not following?

[HuskerNation1]

 

 

Just throwing this out there... Bin Laden didn't attack the world trade centers or Pentagon.

What do you mean by this?

 

Of course, he didn't "personally" attack them. The people who "attacked" on 9/11 all died as a result of the attacks. If that is your position, then I will assume you believe suicide-bombings should not be investigated and justice pursued because the attacker is already dead?

 

Or am I not following?

I think his response was sarcastic following the random response from knapplc about the tea party forming because of a "black" president...but maybe I am wrong.

[funhusker]

 

 

Just throwing this out there... Bin Laden didn't attack the world trade centers or Pentagon.

What do you mean by this?

 

Of course, he didn't "personally" attack them. The people who "attacked" on 9/11 all died as a result of the attacks. If that is your position, then I will assume you believe suicide-bombings should not be investigated and justice pursued because the attacker is already dead?

 

Or am I not following?

I think his response was sarcastic following the random response from knapplc about the tea party forming because of a "black" president...but maybe I am wrong.

 

Knapp's post was somewhat random, yes. But it is also true; at least as far as when the Tea Party formed. The "why" can be debated, I guess.

 

I figured Shark's response was addressing the refernce to Bush's handling of Bin Laden in Guy's post.

 

We're probably both wrong

[BigRedBuster]

The Tea Party didn't exist when Obama took office. It's largely a reaction to the affront of America electing a Black man president.

Sorry, you are really stretching here.

 

The Tea Party was formed as a revolt against bloated government and what has been perceived as too high of taxes. In fact, the first "Tea Party" rally was organized in NYC to protest the "obesity taxes". Don't think that had anything to do with a black President.

[knapplc]

Tea Party Movement:

 

The movement began following Barack Obama's first presidential inauguration (in January 2009) when his administration announced plans to give financial aid to bankrupt homeowners. Following calls by Rick Santelli for a "tea party" by Chicago bond-dealers,^[11][12] conservative groups coalesced around the idea of protesting against Obama's agenda and a series of protests took place, including the 2009 Taxpayer March on Washington. Supporters of the movement subsequently had a major impact on the internal politics of the Republican Party.

 

 

 

89% of the Tea Party is White. More than 60% of them are Republicans. 75% of them are over 45 years old.

 

I get that it's uncomfortable to acknowledge that race issues still affect Americans' psyche. But let's call it what it is.

[BigRedBuster]

Tea Party Movement:

 

The movement began following Barack Obama's first presidential inauguration (in January 2009) when his administration announced plans to give financial aid to bankrupt homeowners. Following calls by Rick Santelli for a "tea party" by Chicago bond-dealers,^[11][12] conservative groups coalesced around the idea of protesting against Obama's agenda and a series of protests took place, including the 2009 Taxpayer March on Washington. Supporters of the movement subsequently had a major impact on the internal politics of the Republican Party.

 

 

 

89% of the Tea Party is White. More than 60% of them are Republicans. 75% of them are over 45 years old.

 

I get that it's uncomfortable to acknowledge that race issues still affect Americans' psyche. But let's call it what it is.

What about the quoted part in your post has anything to do with race? It had to do with people not liking the government bail out of the mortgage industry. That actually started building under the Bush administration.

 

Now....if you just look at taxes and you see someone standing up ranting about them being too high. What race are they usually? White. Why??? I don't know...it's probably because black people think there are much bigger issues that pertain to them than taxes.

 

Just because the majority of the movement is white, doesn't mean it was started BECAUSE a black President was elected.

That's a pretty big leap to make.

[HuskerNation1]

Tea Party Movement:

 

The movement began following Barack Obama's first presidential inauguration (in January 2009) when his administration announced plans to give financial aid to bankrupt homeowners. Following calls by Rick Santelli for a "tea party" by Chicago bond-dealers,^[11][12] conservative groups coalesced around the idea of protesting against Obama's agenda and a series of protests took place, including the 2009 Taxpayer March on Washington. Supporters of the movement subsequently had a major impact on the internal politics of the Republican Party.

 

 

89% of the Tea Party is White. More than 60% of them are Republicans. 75% of them are over 45 years old.

 

I get that it's uncomfortable to acknowledge that race issues still affect Americans' psyche. But let's call it what it is.

Obama being black has nothing to do with the tea party. The seeds of the tea party began before Santelli and Palin is viewed as one of the founders of the movement. If you want to inject race into political parties, what percent of blacks vote Democratic? Should we say that moving forward, those who vote Democratic are racists against white males?