Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Prisoner Swap

Prisoner Swap (Page 3)
Thread Tools
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2014, 02:22 PM
 
BTW, I was reminiscing a few days ago of back in 2011 when I'm under the impression you and I rarely disagreed. Shoes on the other foot nowadays, eh?
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2014, 02:25 PM
 
I was asking your opinion as a member of the general public. I'd say they nominally agree, or Obama would have taken a bigger hit.

I don't think you're copping-out, but could you rephrase your second paragraph? "Defending a topic" is throwing me.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2014, 02:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I don't think you're copping-out, but could you rephrase your second paragraph? "Defending a topic" is throwing me.
Defending the topic: I'm not bothered by the trade for a POW (again I don't think it'd register if there had been no outrage), but I can't honestly, objectively answer if my apathy would have been up to the task if it had been Bush that made the deal (Further when in his presidency he made this deal would matter. After he won reelection liberal emotion took a poor turn, something our conservative brethren seem to have matched with Obama's reelection). Hence, my judgement is impaired.

Do people care if Reagan or Clinton pull this off? I feel like no.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2014, 02:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
BTW, I was reminiscing a few days ago of back in 2011 when I'm under the impression you and I rarely disagreed. Shoes on the other foot nowadays, eh?
Interesting.

I'm certainly crankier than I was in 2011, though some of it may be the issues of that time not highlighting the differences.

Likewise, we can only agree on things like voter suppression so many times without sounding like broken records.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2014, 02:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I'm certainly crankier than I was in 2011, though some of it may be the issues of that time not highlighting the differences.
I agree it's both. I'm more apathetic and exasperated for sure.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2014, 03:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Defending the topic: I'm not bothered by the trade for a POW (again I don't think it'd register if there had been no outrage), but I can't honestly, objectively answer if my apathy would have been up to the task if it had been Bush that made the deal (Further when in his presidency he made this deal would matter. After he won reelection liberal emotion took a poor turn, something our conservative brethren seem to have matched with Obama's reelection). Hence, my judgement is impaired.

Do people care if Reagan or Clinton pull this off? I feel like no.
Okay... that makes sense. Thanks!

As to that point, I don't want to sound flip, but neither Reagan or Clinton were in a position to make deals with the organization who perpetrated 9/11.

This isn't about Obama being who he is, it's about the Taliban being who they are.
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 14, 2014, 09:08 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Interpretation, not speculation, and I would ask what new information came out those few days that you think swung public opinion so strongly. Certainly there's no trace of new info having been posted in this thread during that time.
True, but it's possible it takes the public a few days to process the information. What I cited from the CBS poll seems to be more consistent across the board than what you've posted from Pew. I've been caught misunderstanding subego before so perhaps I've done it again, but I think this is why he expressed some degree of surprise at the polling results you posted.

Perhaps I'm being naive, but it's not unheard of for different outfits to have different results. I have neither the time nor the training, but I would fathom that there's some difference in who they sampled or how they sampled or perhaps phrasing that could affect the results. Which is not to say the poll is without merit.
True again and Pew is certainly a reputable polling firm from what I understand. I didn't say the poll didn't have merit, but speculated on why there are vast difference in results. When subego mentioned his "echo chamber", that seemed to align much more closely with polling from CNN, NBC, ABC, and Fox than your poll from Pew. Without merit? No. In conflict with almost every other poll you'll find on the matter? Yes.
ebuddy
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 14, 2014, 09:19 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Do people care if Reagan or Clinton pull this off? I feel like no.
I've seen others invoke Reagan and even Clinton, but I think part of the problem with Obama is that he's been plagued by so much folly in his second term that he's lost a great deal of credibility among his own base. Going to bat for this Administration has proven bad for your career and the closer we get to November, the further his base must separate themselves from him. And while that's fairly common in a midterm, IMO the abandonment will be unprecedented.
ebuddy
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 16, 2014, 11:49 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Obama is that he's been plagued by so much folly in his second term that he's lost a great deal of credibility among his own base.
I have no idea what you're talking about.

Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
And while that's fairly common in a midterm, IMO the abandonment will be unprecedented.
Let's just say I think your view on this is... colored.
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 17, 2014, 07:21 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
I have no idea what you're talking about.

Let's just say I think your view on this is... colored.
This is another case where you could certainly question my analysis, but you'd have to be a complete shut-in with no access to media or knowledge of history to claim you have no idea what I'm talking about.
  • The IRS scandal is the highest order of abuse by an arm of the Federal government to silence critics around elections and when Lerner's "missing" emails are put before an independent council, it will continue to affirm mistrust in this particular government institution.
  • The VA scandal, now somewhat quieted from the Bergdahl folly, will return to show an Administration that is feckless in crisis and yet another government institution run amok for political gain, this one directly related to health care.
  • "I hate health insurance companies" is not health care reform. With rising premiums, deductibles, co-pays, and overall health care costs; Democrats viewed as in support of the measure are walking themselves back as carefully as possible. The prospect of employers dropping employees into the exchange have unions splitting away from Democrats in Connecticut, Arizona, Oregon, Minnesota, Illinois, and Maryland to name a few.
  • "I hate coal" is not an energy policy and Senate Democrats trying to hold their seats in North Dakota, two West Virginia seats, Alaska, and Louisiana for example cannot separate themselves from Obama fast enough. He's also losing union support from his dithering on the Keystone XL pipeline.
  • Our anemic economic recovery is Obama's. Our failed foreign policy under deteriorating relationships with Russia, Saudi Arabia, and the EU is Obama's. Iraq is a fiasco, now turning to Iran for negotiation -- with whom we're trying to force into compliance on nuclear proliferation losing us any semblance of leverage we may have had, Obama's. Immigration is a fiasco and essentially guaranteeing no movement on reform through 2016, Obama's.

Jimmy Carter's folly domestically and abroad would usher in at least 13 years of conservative growth and popularity and this Administration is really beginning to make Carter's look adept. You say my judgment is colored, but then I think a great many on the left are burying their heads in the sand with each new crisis in failed policy.
ebuddy
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 17, 2014, 07:54 AM
 
Assuming Democrats are listening at all.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 17, 2014, 12:19 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
This is another case where you could certainly question my analysis, but you'd have to be a complete shut-in with no access to media or knowledge of history to claim you have no idea what I'm talking about.
  • The IRS scandal is the highest order of abuse by an arm of the Federal government to silence critics around elections and when Lerner's "missing" emails are put before an independent council, it will continue to affirm mistrust in this particular government institution.
  • The VA scandal, now somewhat quieted from the Bergdahl folly, will return to show an Administration that is feckless in crisis and yet another government institution run amok for political gain, this one directly related to health care.
  • "I hate health insurance companies" is not health care reform. With rising premiums, deductibles, co-pays, and overall health care costs; Democrats viewed as in support of the measure are walking themselves back as carefully as possible. The prospect of employers dropping employees into the exchange have unions splitting away from Democrats in Connecticut, Arizona, Oregon, Minnesota, Illinois, and Maryland to name a few.
  • "I hate coal" is not an energy policy and Senate Democrats trying to hold their seats in North Dakota, two West Virginia seats, Alaska, and Louisiana for example cannot separate themselves from Obama fast enough. He's also losing union support from his dithering on the Keystone XL pipeline.
  • Our anemic economic recovery is Obama's. Our failed foreign policy under deteriorating relationships with Russia, Saudi Arabia, and the EU is Obama's. Iraq is a fiasco, now turning to Iran for negotiation -- with whom we're trying to force into compliance on nuclear proliferation losing us any semblance of leverage we may have had, Obama's. Immigration is a fiasco and essentially guaranteeing no movement on reform through 2016, Obama's.
You said base, though, which I don't think gives a lick about some of those and doesn't buy into the scandal of others of those. Yes, he's lost a lot of support by disillusioned liberals and Democrats, but that's for not being liberal enough.
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 18, 2014, 06:55 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
You said base, though, which I don't think gives a lick about some of those and doesn't buy into the scandal of others of those. Yes, he's lost a lot of support by disillusioned liberals and Democrats, but that's for not being liberal enough.
Granted, many liberals aren't going to accept "scandal" because of course that implies scandalous behavior, but I maintain they're having to bury their collective heads in the sand -- publicly anyway. When these issues become something the media can no longer ignore, they will separate and I believe the IRS' targeting of political foes is one such issue. It's also possible you're correct in that liberals truly aren't concerned with government squelching freedom of speech, shoddy health care and medical treatment, feckless foreign policy, and undermining unions as long as there's a (D) after the President's name. But the portion of his base living in coal-producing States must separate, others can't run from the VA fiasco because it's too politically volatile, they can't run from a policy that has children holed up in shelters like cattle, and it's increasingly difficult to defend Big Government overall. IMO, it's this sort of folly that puts Republicans back in seats of government and rebuilds the conservative Democratic base ala blue-dog or Reagan Democrats.
ebuddy
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 18, 2014, 11:01 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
It's also possible you're correct in that liberals truly aren't concerned with government squelching freedom of speech, shoddy health care and medical treatment, feckless foreign policy, and undermining unions as long as there's a (D) after the President's name.
Of they just don't see it the same way. Jesus, ebuddy.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 18, 2014, 04:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
It's also possible you're correct in that liberals truly aren't concerned with government squelching freedom of speech, shoddy health care and medical treatment, feckless foreign policy, and undermining unions as long as there's a (D) after the President's name.
All things which GWB was guilty of and Republicans didn't complain about when he did them.
Someone pointed out that this prisoner swap outrage is similarly hypocritical when compared to what Oliver North did and is still admired by the Reps for doing.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 18, 2014, 05:25 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Of they just don't see it the same way. Jesus, ebuddy.
He's dropped 23% among Hispanics. He's dropped 10% among African-Americans. He's dropped approximately 15% among those under 30 years old. Democrats' approval rating has dropped 13% overall with centrist-Democrats dropping 16% and this as of December of last year.

New polling out today showing all-time lows in nearly every category with 63% expressing "wrong direction", an all-time high overall disapproval rating, and a foreign policy approval of 37%. Poll analysis shows the top three reasons given were Obamacare, the president’s foreign policy and his decision to swap Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl for five Taliban members. Mind you, this was all processed before the immigrant child sheltering debacle and Iraq degradation stories broke. Notwithstanding the fact that these results come from the same crowd showing 61% support for immediate climate change action which I'd argue shows a predominantly center-left response.

No one's forcing you to accept it, Dakar. There will always be a few holdouts who might be kidding themselves that Congresspeople have stopped worrying about maintaining seats or that there's virtually nothing this President can do that would alienate his base, but that doesn't mean my analysis is colored.
ebuddy
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Jun 18, 2014, 05:30 PM
 
Christ, people... it's "analysis of color".
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 18, 2014, 05:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
All things which GWB was guilty of and Republicans didn't complain about when he did them.
Someone pointed out that this prisoner swap outrage is similarly hypocritical when compared to what Oliver North did and is still admired by the Reps for doing.
Can you elaborate?

For example, I don't remember Ollie North swapping 5 Taliban leaders for a deserter against the will of Congress. I don't remember the IRS' targeting of groups based on political affiliation and related cover-ups, or gun-running in Mexico and resultant DoJ perjure. I don't remember losing an Ambassador or the resultant cover-ups and lack of action. While Bush was caught with his pants down and received a great deal of criticism from both sides of the aisle on NSA-tapping, he went to Congress and fixed it with a set of guidelines governing the activity. All available analysis indicates that the NSA tapping spiked significantly upon Obama entering office in conflict with the recent guidelines including the specific targeting of journalists and their families -- none of which do I recall during the Bush Administration even with 9/11 as a monumental excuse. 80% of the American public approved of the cost and quality of their health care while Bush was in office and his base was never as concerned about alienating a Union bloc. While Bush's foreign policy approval rating hit a low of 35% upon leaving office, a strong majority of the American public, both Democrats and Republicans supported action in Iraq -- the sole source of his increased disapproval.
ebuddy
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 18, 2014, 06:47 PM
 
45/47
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 18, 2014, 10:10 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
All things which GWB was guilty of and Republicans didn't complain about when he did them.
Someone pointed out that this prisoner swap outrage is similarly hypocritical when compared to what Oliver North did and is still admired by the Reps for doing.
Bush was incompetent, not devious or willfully corrupt, there's quite a difference.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 19, 2014, 01:32 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
He's dropped 23% among Hispanics. He's dropped 10% among African-Americans. He's dropped approximately 15% among those under 30 years old. Democrats' approval rating has dropped 13% overall with centrist-Democrats dropping 16% and this as of December of last year.

New polling out today showing all-time lows in nearly every category with 63% expressing "wrong direction", an all-time high overall disapproval rating, and a foreign policy approval of 37%. Poll analysis shows the top three reasons given were Obamacare, the president’s foreign policy and his decision to swap Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl for five Taliban members. Mind you, this was all processed before the immigrant child sheltering debacle and Iraq degradation stories broke. Notwithstanding the fact that these results come from the same crowd showing 61% support for immediate climate change action which I'd argue shows a predominantly center-left response.

No one's forcing you to accept it, Dakar. There will always be a few holdouts who might be kidding themselves that Congresspeople have stopped worrying about maintaining seats or that there's virtually nothing this President can do that would alienate his base, but that doesn't mean my analysis is colored.
I didn't say he support hadn't dropped, I said Democrats had a different point of view of the matters you brought up (Case in point: Hispanics are unhappy with him deporting too much, i.e., not liberal enough). The only thing you mentioned in this that was in the list I dismissed was Obamacare, and I'm not rehashing that.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 19, 2014, 06:43 PM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
Bush was incompetent, not devious or willfully corrupt, there's quite a difference.
So if Obama was an idiot, no-one would mind him infringing their privacy or taking away their precious freedoms? Yeah, right.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
unicast reversepath
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: 3rd Rock from the Sun
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 19, 2014, 07:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
So if Obama was an idiot, no-one would mind him infringing their privacy or taking away their precious freedoms? Yeah, right.
But Obama IS an idiot! (an incompetent inexperienced ignorant hack)
If you have Ghosts, you have Everything!
     
unicast reversepath
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: 3rd Rock from the Sun
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 19, 2014, 07:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
All things which GWB was guilty of and Republicans didn't complain about when he did them.
Someone pointed out that this prisoner swap outrage is similarly hypocritical when compared to what Oliver North did and is still admired by the Reps for doing.

Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Can you elaborate?

For example, I don't remember Ollie North swapping 5 Taliban leaders for a deserter against the will of Congress. I don't remember the IRS' targeting of groups based on political affiliation and related cover-ups, or gun-running in Mexico and resultant DoJ perjure. I don't remember losing an Ambassador or the resultant cover-ups and lack of action. While Bush was caught with his pants down and received a great deal of criticism from both sides of the aisle on NSA-tapping, he went to Congress and fixed it with a set of guidelines governing the activity. All available analysis indicates that the NSA tapping spiked significantly upon Obama entering office in conflict with the recent guidelines including the specific targeting of journalists and their families -- none of which do I recall during the Bush Administration even with 9/11 as a monumental excuse. 80% of the American public approved of the cost and quality of their health care while Bush was in office and his base was never as concerned about alienating a Union bloc. While Bush's foreign policy approval rating hit a low of 35% upon leaving office, a strong majority of the American public, both Democrats and Republicans supported action in Iraq -- the sole source of his increased disapproval.
If you have Ghosts, you have Everything!
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 20, 2014, 07:09 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
I didn't say he support hadn't dropped, I said Democrats had a different point of view of the matters you brought up (Case in point: Hispanics are unhappy with him deporting too much, i.e., not liberal enough). The only thing you mentioned in this that was in the list I dismissed was Obamacare, and I'm not rehashing that.
And I didn't say he'd lost his entire base. I said he's having a credibility problem. And yes, while Hispanics may not be happy with him not being liberal enough, there are a wealth of Democrats on the record as having supported the ACA now distancing themselves from it and its purveyor for example. Notwithstanding his dropping support again, across the board in issues ranging from foreign policy to the economy and abysmal crisis management. This has to do with a majority not believing this President is capable of leading... on essentially anything.
ebuddy
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 20, 2014, 10:55 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Democrats on the record as having supported the ACA now distancing themselves from it and its purveyor for example.
Ok, here's why I roll my eyes about this: 2010 was a repudiation of ACA. 2012 was the repudiation of the repudiation of ACA. And now I guess 2014 is the repudiation of the repudiation of the repudiation. My point? It's overemphasized. It made sense in 2010 fresh off the vote. And it had some influence in 2012 when repeal was the centerpiece of the Republican platform. But now what? You can't repeal (be honest), and it hasn't been the nation destroying disaster it was claimed. Certainly you've brought up much more current issues that will matter than ****ing ACA.


Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
This has to do with a majority not believing this President is capable of leading... on essentially anything.
Now this, I think is a good point. As far as being a President, Obama is done. His base lost faith, he has no power in the legislature, it's completely over. And this is before the midterms where I was reading second term presidents officially go lame duck.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 20, 2014, 06:10 PM
 
Originally Posted by unicast reversepath View Post
But Obama IS an idiot! (an incompetent inexperienced ignorant hack)
Which would make Bush a brain-damaged chimp?

Most presidents are inexperienced at being president before they start I hear.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 21, 2014, 09:16 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Ok, here's why I roll my eyes about this: 2010 was a repudiation of ACA. 2012 was the repudiation of the repudiation of ACA. And now I guess 2014 is the repudiation of the repudiation of the repudiation. My point? It's overemphasized. It made sense in 2010 fresh off the vote. And it had some influence in 2012 when repeal was the centerpiece of the Republican platform. But now what? You can't repeal (be honest), and it hasn't been the nation destroying disaster it was claimed. Certainly you've brought up much more current issues that will matter than ****ing ACA.
It's every bit the nation-destroying disaster it was claimed to be. Granted, regular reporting on its folly and 54+% disapproval rating has been replaced by a new folly, nearly every other week. Otherwise, I completely agree with you that there is little stomach for "repeal" and I've long-maintained the GOP needs to drop that message and start getting specific about what they'll change. It should look like "repeal" in first dismantling the aspects that can garner bipartisan support such as the medical device tax and the individual mandate, and then leverage their wins this November by sending bills to the President for opening interstate plans, HSA's and compatible plans, etc. In short, there has to be a skeletal, free-market framework that the ACA can be failed-over to and the GOP has a lot of work cut out for them.

Now this, I think is a good point. As far as being a President, Obama is done. His base lost faith, he has no power in the legislature, it's completely over. And this is before the midterms where I was reading second term presidents officially go lame duck.
They generally do, but there's still a great deal this President wants to do for his legacy. If he doesn't go full-on dictator with his pen and phone, he'll have to try to negotiate with Republicans. I'd argue there's still time and while not an exact comparison, it was after a midterm defeat in Clinton's first term that the Contract with America was launched.
ebuddy
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 21, 2014, 12:59 PM
 
You know that old saw about "if you don't like the US, why don't you leave" or "love it or leave it"? Well, some friends of ours surprised us and did just that. Ahh, you think they're disgruntled Republicans, maybe tinfoil hat Neocons, right? *BUZZ!* Nope, they're serious Lefties. This administration's civil rights record is so shitty, that an attorney for the ACLU (it was the bulk of her work) took her family and ran to, get this, IRELAND (her mother was an Irish citizen) and is considering asking for political asylum due to the morbid state of US civil liberties. She's not the only one, either, several more of her colleagues are considering doing the same, citing that Obama is "a ruthless demagogue, fully controlled by special interest and determined to further cripple personal freedoms, replacing them with popular social justice". She also used a phrase I've been fond of, "... doubling-down on every bad decision made by the former administration". Yikes.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 23, 2014, 02:28 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
It's every bit the nation-destroying disaster it was claimed to be.
We do not live in the same reality.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 23, 2014, 02:31 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
If he doesn't go full-on dictator with his pen
Also, how is Obama has yet to catch up to Carter, Reagan, Clinton or W in executive orders. WTF?
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 23, 2014, 11:16 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Also, how is Obama has yet to catch up to Carter, Reagan, Clinton or W in executive orders. WTF?
Again, as I've said ~ a half dozen times already, it's not the number of EOs, it's what's in them and how they're used. He's a tyrant and a would-be dictator, there's no other way to say it.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
unicast reversepath
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: 3rd Rock from the Sun
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 24, 2014, 05:04 AM
 
If you have Ghosts, you have Everything!
     
unicast reversepath
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: 3rd Rock from the Sun
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 24, 2014, 05:08 AM
 
If you have Ghosts, you have Everything!
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 24, 2014, 08:29 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
We do not live in the same reality.
I'd argue there are some who simply choose not to accept reality and/or lack information. For example, your complaint of Executive Order counts; citing more of them from other Presidents.

The reality is, the purpose of an Executive Order is to carry out or execute legislation that has already been passed by Congress in order to effectively implement their bill. This is not how Obama is treating law. For example, Obama wanted immigration reform so instead of winning hearts and minds in Congress -- determined it was politically untenable and simply stopped the deportation of thousands of illegal immigrants. He committed the US military to action in Libya without Congressional approval. He's changed so many aspects of his signature legislation that it has become laughable. Not in order to implement his signature legislation mind you, but to pass it and then reshape it through Executive Order. He has unilaterally claimed the authority to target individuals for drone attacks, including American citizens overseas. Since when can the death penalty be administered from the sky, without due process, by the President of the US? He's literally writing new law by Executive Order. Imagine the next President of the Unites States, we'll say a Republican; determines he or she does not appreciate the capital gains tax and will simply no longer enforce it? Or offer EPA waivers to coal giants and the most egregious environmental offenders? Or reshapes laws that certain pollutant thresholds must be met in order to trigger existing regulation, but sets that threshold so high as to render the regulation entirely meaningless?
ebuddy
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 24, 2014, 08:32 AM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
Again, as I've said ~ a half dozen times already, it's not the number of EOs, it's what's in them and how they're used. He's a tyrant and a would-be dictator, there's no other way to say it.
And it's all fun and games and hope and change until the next Republican takes office.
ebuddy
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 24, 2014, 11:03 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
I'd argue there are some who simply choose not to accept reality and/or lack information.
Of course, but for something that has destroyed the nation, I'm having a hard time discerning the pre-ACA destroyed America of June 2013 from the post-ACA destroyed America of June 2014.

Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
The reality is, the purpose of an Executive Order is to carry out or execute legislation that has already been passed by Congress in order to effectively implement their bill. This is not how Obama is treating law. For example, Obama wanted immigration reform so instead of winning hearts and minds in Congress -- determined it was politically untenable and simply stopped the deportation of thousands of illegal immigrants. He committed the US military to action in Libya without Congressional approval. He's changed so many aspects of his signature legislation that it has become laughable. Not in order to implement his signature legislation mind you, but to pass it and then reshape it through Executive Order. He has unilaterally claimed the authority to target individuals for drone attacks, including American citizens overseas. Since when can the death penalty be administered from the sky, without due process, by the President of the US? He's literally writing new law by Executive Order. Imagine the next President of the Unites States, we'll say a Republican; determines he or she does not appreciate the capital gains tax and will simply no longer enforce it? Or offer EPA waivers to coal giants and the most egregious environmental offenders? Or reshapes laws that certain pollutant thresholds must be met in order to trigger existing regulation, but sets that threshold so high as to render the regulation entirely meaningless?
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
Again, as I've said ~ a half dozen times already, it's not the number of EOs, it's what's in them and how they're used. He's a tyrant and a would-be dictator, there's no other way to say it.
Which is a good point, but unless I take the time to go through each executive order of his predecessors and compare and contrast its just indeterminate to me.

I mean something like this:
For example, Obama wanted immigration reform so instead of winning hearts and minds in Congress -- determined it was politically untenable and simply stopped the deportation of thousands of illegal immigrants
is a good point, but perspective changes when you realize Obama has been deporting illegals like no other president before him. The entire issue of EO quality is a huge grey area.
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 24, 2014, 11:06 AM
 
NO THEY HAVEN'T! They have STOPPED all the deportations. Have been stopped since Feb '14. the MSM hasn't been reporting 'news' since 2000.
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 24, 2014, 01:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Of course, but for something that has destroyed the nation, I'm having a hard time discerning the pre-ACA destroyed America of June 2013 from the post-ACA destroyed America of June 2014.
It's going to take time. Without significant modifications to the ACA, it will continue to adversely affect more than a sixth of the US economy leaving little headroom for other, uncontrollable circumstances. It has adversely affected the distribution of care, the insurance industry, employment and labor market, GDP, and other facets of US wellness far too numerous to list here. Is it an atom bomb over NYC, destroying all in its wake in minutes? No, but then that's just distaste for hyperbole, not an acceptance of reality.
ebuddy
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 24, 2014, 01:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
is a good point, but perspective changes when you realize Obama has been deporting illegals like no other president before him. The entire issue of EO quality is a huge grey area.
How does that make an abuse of EOs better?
ebuddy
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2014, 11:08 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
It's going to take time.
Then you used the word "destroyed" incorrectly. I believe the term you are looking for is "destroying."

Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
How does that make an abuse of EOs better?
It is neither an defense or indictment of EOs. It's simply an observation that the matter is so open to interpretation, spans 100s of EOs over decades and several presidents that it's not possible (or logical) to be convinced of the rightness or wrongness of the matter by a few dudes saying, "Nah bro, he's the worst."
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2014, 11:44 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Then you used the word "destroyed" incorrectly. I believe the term you are looking for is "destroying."
FIGHT! FIGHT!

You're the only one who used the word "destroyed".

It is neither an defense or indictment of EOs. It's simply an observation that the matter is so open to interpretation, spans 100s of EOs over decades and several presidents that it's not possible (or logical) to be convinced of the rightness or wrongness of the matter by a few dudes saying, "Nah bro, he's the worst."
i.e. When the President is an (R), it is never subject to interpretation through hundreds of EO's. It's an abuse. When the President is a (D), interpretation becomes of paramount importance.
( Last edited by ebuddy; Jun 25, 2014 at 05:30 PM. )
ebuddy
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 26, 2014, 10:26 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
FIGHT! FIGHT!

You're the only one who used the word "destroyed".
I'll mea culpa this. I read this:
It's every bit the nation-destroying disaster it was claimed to be.
And incorrectly inferred the 'was" made the destroying past tense.


Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
i.e. When the President is an (R), it is never subject to interpretation through hundreds of EO's. It's an abuse. When the President is a (D), interpretation becomes of paramount importance.
I didn't say anything remotely close to that, but feel free to believe it if it makes you happy.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:26 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,