• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

A question to the Anti-Bush, Obama true believer types.

Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Hannity, rush, and the gamut reamed bush on the bailouts. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Care to find me a single clip where they called Bush a socialist or got as fired up as MSNBC did after Obama's speech?

And what do you have to say about Jon Stewart and the like? Do they count as the Obama true believer types that you're railing on about?
 
Last edited:
roughdraft274 said:
Here's a good question. How many righties on fox and talk radio and in general reamed Bush for all his screw ups anything like The Daily Show and MSNBC has to Obama lately?

If you can't count Jon Stewart , Keith Olberman, Chris Matthews and Rachel Maddow as those frothing at the mouth die-hard Obama supporters that you're talking about, then who the hell can you call that? Show me where Rush or Sean Hannity or Glenn Beck (during Bush's presidency mind you) bashed Bush like the people I just mentioned bashed Obama? You can find a few that did, and if I remember right, the righties circled around their guys and ousted anyone who dared to challenge them.
Click to expand...

Olbermann and Stewart are criticizing Obama for not being liberal enough. Are you saying that there were no conservatives criticizing Bush for not being conservative enough?
 
VanceMack said:
Since I havent seen EVERY post you make i will accept that you have. What I DO see is you AND your little dog Toto too pretty much parroting liberal ideology at every turn...but...maybe thats just me...
Click to expand...

Search term: Bush III
Username: Deuce
 
RightinNYC said:
Olbermann and Stewart are criticizing Obama for not being liberal enough. Are you saying that there were no conservatives criticizing Bush for not being conservative enough?
Click to expand...

Given that the debate is that Obama is largely following Bush's approach in security and foreign policy matters, I would say that the criticism of not being liberal enough is justified as liberals tend to have a different desired approach to these things. I am not sure where you are trying to go with this.

Besides, I thought a lot of the tea party stuff was that people like Bush and the rest of congress were too liberal. I know I have heard Beck mention that Bush isn't liberal enough as well, sorry, I don't have a source.
 
Last edited:
megaprogman said:
Given that the debate is that Obama is largely following Bush's approach in security and foreign policy matters, I would say that the criticism of not being liberal enough is justified as liberals tend to have a different desired approach to these things. I am not sure where you are trying to go with this.
Click to expand...




actually in this thread, I am wondering why some of our more vocal anti-bush types, who spoke on the specific issues ad nauseum under bush, seem to be far more forgiving of the current occupant of the white house.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
actually in this thread, I am wondering why some of our more vocal anti-bush types, who spoke on the specific issues ad nauseum under bush, seem to be far more forgiving of the current occupant of the white house.
Click to expand...

I meant RightinNYC.

But to your point, I think the reason is that liberals may not be getting everything they want, but certainly they are getting more of it. To me, its like dinner. If I get a meal full of things I dislike, I will not be happy. However, if I get a meal with most things that I like, I will be more satisfied with it in general. Why would I be motivated to protest someone if I am getting a lot of what I want?
 
Last edited:
[derail]I miss the function where it would put new posts automatically at the end of threads that are busy, so you did not have to reload the page to see new posts. This thread reminded me of that.[/derail]
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
FOXNews.com - Resolution Opposing Bailouts as 'Socialism' Airs Rift in GOP






:shrug:
Click to expand...

That's what you call reaming?

We're not trying to criticize any one, any one person. What we are talking about is conservative solutions to these economic problems and recognizing that some Republicans have supported policies that will not lead to economic recovery, that are not conservative,
Click to expand...
Mind you I don't even think Sean Hannity mentions Bush by name in that video, lol. He spent the whole time bashing Obama, lol. You really showed me, lol.
 
roughdraft274 said:
That's what you call reaming?

Mind you I don't even think Sean Hannity mentions Bush by name in that video, lol. He spent the whole time bashing Obama, lol. You really showed me, lol.
Click to expand...




***Yawn*** that was a 2 second search. I proved my point.
 
megaprogman said:
1. Preventing Genocide is not legitimate in my view as we were not attacked. I didn't like it when Clinton did it either.
2. I don't care about that. Again, we were not attacked.
3. Did those terrorists attack us?
I don't care about legalities or institutions and what not while making a call on whether I support something. This is because I am, at heart, a noninterventionalist.

Personally, I think we should probably leave afghanistan as I don't see us ever doing anything positive there as their culture is not one that we will ever change. It would be more practical to leave now and accomplish nothing than to leave in the future and accomplish nothing since it would cost less in lives and money. However, we were attacked, so it is legit in my view.
Click to expand...

there is a world of difference between "I dont like those reasons" and legitimate reasons. Most military folk I served with thought the Serbian war was a farce...but we went...we served...we supported the president...because thats what we do in a time of war. And while YOu may not have thought genocide was a valid reason, a great majority on the left did. So...I'll accept you at your word with the good rev's endorsement that you arent 'one of those guys"...but seriously...you REALLY arent claiming those people dont exist are you? Hell I have no problem saying there are the same number of mindless automatons on the right that hate anything not 'right.'
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
***Yawn*** that was a 2 second search. I proved my point.
Click to expand...

A video where Hannity bashes Obama proves your point?

And yet still you haven't mentioned anything about MSNBC or the Daily Show and how they criticized Obama after his speech and for some of the issues that have been pointed out in this thread that the left just gives Obama a pass on. Hell, one of your articles was from the koolaid drinking DemocracyNow.

Video: Respect My Authoritah | The Daily Show | Comedy Central



If you're whole point is that the left doesn't criticize their own side as harshly as they criticize the right, then this is a fairly pointless thread and I think you need to get some fine cheese for that wine.

If you're making a point that both sides are more reluctant to criticize their own side harshly, then you have a fair point, however plainly obvious it is.
 
roughdraft274 said:
A video where Hannity bashes Obama proves your point?

And yet still you haven't mentioned anything about MSNBC or the Daily Show and how they criticized Obama after his speech and for some of the issues that have been pointed out in this thread that the left just gives Obama a pass on. Hell, one of your articles was from the koolaid drinking DemocracyNow.

Video: Respect My Authoritah | The Daily Show | Comedy Central



If you're whole point is that the left doesn't criticize their own side as harshly as they criticize the right, then this is a fairly pointless thread and I think you need to get some fine cheese for that wine.

If you're making a point that both sides are more reluctant to criticize their own side harshly, then you have a fair point, however plainly obvious it is.
Click to expand...



Haven't mentioned it?


Hell son, I started a thread on it.... :lamo


http://www.debatepolitics.com/news-...ared-carter-dont-sense-executive-command.html
 
Last edited:
roughdraft274 said:
Care to find me a single clip where they called Bush a socialist or got as fired up as MSNBC did after Obama's speech?

And what do you have to say about Jon Stewart and the like? Do they count as the Obama true believer types that you're railing on about?
Click to expand...

Of course Stewart is biased Pro-bama. The other night he railed on the BP exec for yachting and I just KNEW he would say something like..."the news of the BP exec yachting was so upsetting to the president that he yipped a putt..."but...nope...NOTHING about Obama. Day 64...oil still gushing to the count of 60000 barrels a day...and...nothing...

OH he hits him every once in a while...sure...but as often as he did (and does Bush?) Not even close. In fact...dems have been in control of the house and senate since 2006...he STILL focuses on the republicans...of COURSE he is biased. You would have to be a mindles idiot to not see it.

And BTW...I LOVE watching Jon Stweart...even during the Bush admin...but he does a LOUSY Obama! ;)
 
Last edited:
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Haven't mentioned it?


Hell son, I started a thread on it.... :lamo
Click to expand...
I meant how you haven't mentioned anything in this thread about how that goes against your entire preconceived notion of the whole Obama true believer thing. If you can't consider any of those people a true believer type then who the hell can you consider one?

I though that point was fairly obvious but I should have pointed it out even more for you.
 
roughdraft274 said:
I meant how you haven't mentioned anything in this thread about how that goes against your entire preconceived notion of the whole Obama true believer thing. If you can't consider any of those people a true believer type then who the hell can you consider one?

I though that point was fairly obvious but I should have pointed it out even more for you.
Click to expand...




I listed the folks specifically I was talking about. :shrug:
 
VanceMack said:
Of course Stewart is biased Pro-bama. The other night he railed on the BP exec for yachting and I just KNEW he would say something like..."the news of the BP exec yachting was so upsetting to the president that he yipped a putt..."but...nope...NOTHING about Obama. Day 64...oil still gushing to the count of 60000 barrels a day...and...nothing...

OH he hits him every once in a while...sure...but as often as he did (and does Bush?) Not even close. In fact...dems have been in control of the house and senate since 2006...he STILL focuses on the republicans...of COURSE he is biased. You would have to be a mindles idiot to not see it.
Click to expand...
There's a difference between biased towards Obama and what this whole thread was started for, for trying to push the notion that theres a portion of the left that refuses to criticize Obama. You'll never hear me say that MSNBC or the daily show aren't slanted towards being liberal or anything like that. I only pointed it out because the argument is being made that some on the left refuse to criticize Obama. There's a difference.
 
roughdraft274 said:
There's a difference between biased towards Obama and what this whole thread was started for, for trying to push the notion that theres a portion of the left that refuses to criticize Obama. You'll never hear me say that MSNBC or the daily show aren't slanted towards being liberal or anything like that. I only pointed it out because the argument is being made that some on the left refuse to criticize Obama. There's a difference.
Click to expand...

Sigh...

I know. I was commenting on your post about Jon Stewart. No...he isnt occasional opposed to ranting about Obama. Yes he is biased.

Let me ask you...do you believe there are 'true beleivers' on the right...people that will hate Obama no matter what and never see any good in anything he does?
 
VanceMack said:
And the lack of protests at campuses across the country disparaging this evil war monger and his anti-civil rights admninsitration sort of backs up the OP...
Click to expand...

Not really. Many realize that some time has to be allowed. And Bagram as always been out of sight and out of mind. Too few actually know about it, which is a real shame. And the economy and even the BP spill has distracted more than enough people at this time.

I hope that changes.
 
RightinNYC said:
It doesn't look like we are.

The agreed-upon timeline had all combat troops withdrawing by August 31, 2010, leaving just 35-50k support troops behind. Two months prior to the deadline, there are 90,000 troops still in Iraq. Removing 40-55k troops in two months is logistically difficult to say the least.
Click to expand...

Well, that deadline has happened yet, so we really can't say it won't. And even if it moved a little slower, the problem would be more if it didn't move. I'm not concerned YET.
 
Boo Radley said:
Well, that deadline has happened yet, so we really can't say it won't. And even if it moved a little slower, the problem would be more if it didn't move. I'm not concerned YET.
Click to expand...


:lol: I guess basic logistics escapes you. ;)
 
VanceMack said:
Not to Clinton...Gore...every democrat in Congress...virtually all the world intel agencies...

Genocide is a bogus reason? Damn Clinton for taking us to war against Serbia. No WONDER the left protested him and villified him.

Iraqs refusal to Comply with UN resolutions regarding his WMD program was bogus? Again...Clinton should be placed before a war crimes tribunal for attacking a country 8 times for bogus reasons.

Iraqs ties to global terrorism a bogus reason? Then...ummm...why did we attack Afghanistan again??? And why are we still there???
Click to expand...

Actually to them as well. And many did criticize Clinton, including those on the right who caled his reasons bogus. Not to mention his people declared the threat over after the last attack.

And yes, Saddam's ties were bogus. Don't think we all need to go through them all again, but he was of no consequences globally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom