Wehrwolfen
Banned
- Joined
- May 11, 2013
- Messages
- 2,329
- Reaction score
- 402
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
You mean a president who changes his mind about starting a war! Outrageous!
You mean a president who changes his mind about starting a war! Outrageous!
No a hypocritical incompetent president bringing us to the brink of war.
Great thread title!
And...great deflection with your comment. Isn't it horrible how libs can't refrain from bringing up Bush whenever someone bangs on Obama!?!?
I'll bet if you look really hard, you can find another blog post claiming that our President is awful. Go ahead....try.
Once G.W. Bush made up his mind to attack Iraq which was no threat to the USA he never wavered, he kept scratching around until he scraped up enough excuses to convince other pols to join his mad rush to war.
Take a look at the results. The USA gained nothing in Iraq, but lost a lot of American troops and treasure. Iran did gain a shia government in Iraq, so I guess that we can't say that the war was a total loss-it did help Iran.
"Better days are coming." ~ But not for today's out of touch, running out of time, GOP.
Who should you compare Obama to if not Bush 43?
Coaches who take over for other coaches get compared all the time. Quarterbacks who take over for other QBs get compared all the time as well. It certainly isn't something that is unique to the Presidents.
What bothers me is that the comparisons are usually inaccurate. Bush had 9/11 to contend with as President and we needed to spend a whole lot of money to stabilize the markets which are based on confidence as much as anything else so when you compare his spending to Obama's spending you have to account for 9/11. However, in Obama's case, we had a burst housing bubble shortly before he took office...so some extra spending was likely to be needed there. I think both men botched the spending in ways that were profoundly juvenile
No a hypocritical incompetent president bringing us to the brink of war.
First, have your sarcasm meter checked. It needs service.
Second....I agree 100% that the markets are based on confidence. Which is why one must applaud the right's attempts to undermine consumer confidence at every turn.
What the hell does "profoundly juvenile" mean when it comes to federal spending?
As for "profoundly juvenile", municipalities across the nation bought stuff they with DHS money that they could not afford otherwise with regular budgets so what the money was intended for--DHS--was not what the money was used for. Rather, the money ended up being used to purchase stuff like normal firefighting equipment, road repairs, security upgrades at local buildings, etc.. And these are just the ones I know about. I imagine if you were to drill down further into what all of these monies were actually used for you'd find DVD players, tablet computers, etc... that were purchased with DHS funds.
When/if we get hit again, the supposedly shiny new equipment we bought will be well worn and likely obsolete.
For Obama, his handling of the TARP was botched and those who got tax money were able to pay their executives bonuses in some cases if memory serves.
Are you talking about Bush again?
Nice try, but even I don't think you're that dumb.
You ABSOLUTELY were talking about Bush. The only original words in your OP pertained to Bush. You are obsessed with Bush. Bush is on your mind. Bush, Bush, Bush!
No a hypocritical incompetent president bringing us to the brink of war.
So why is the Left rushing to war?
Left? Sure looks pretty bipartisan to me...
John Boehner Says He'll Back Obama on Syria Strikes
That and all the noise McCain is making... just sayin'.
He's a spineless RINO. Please, don't get me started on that fool.
You mean a president who changes his mind about starting a war! Outrageous!
Peter Wehner
09.02.2013
It’s reported that President Obama was ready to order a military strike against Syria, with or without Congress’s blessing, but “on Friday night, he suddenly changed his mind.” According to the Huffington Post:
Senior administration officials describing Obama’s about-face Saturday offered a portrait of a president who began to wrestle with his own decision – at first internally, then confiding his views to his chief of staff, and finally summoning his aides for an evening session in the Oval Office to say he’d had a change of heart.
In light of all this, it’s worth posing a few questions:
1. Why didn’t the president seek congressional authority before the administration began to beat the war drums this past week? Did the idea not occur to him? It’s not as if this is an obscure issue. When you’re in the White House and preparing to launch military force against a sovereign nation, whether or not to seek the approval of Congress is usually somewhere near the top of the to-do list.
And why has the urgency to act that we saw from the administration during the last week–when Assad’s use of chemical weapons was referred to by the secretary of state as a “moral obscenity”–given way to an air of casualness, with Obama not even calling Congress back into session to debate his military strike against Syria?
2. The president didn’t seek congressional approval for his military strike in Libya. Why does he believe he needs it in Syria?
3. Mr. Obama, in his Rose Garden statement on Saturday, still insisted he has the authority to strike Syria without congressional approval. So what happens if Congress votes down a use-of-force resolution? Does the president strike Syria anyway? If so, will it be an evanescent bombing, intended to be limited in scope and duration, while doing nothing to change the war’s balance of power? Or does the president completely back down? Does he even know? Has he thought through in advance anything related to Syria? Or is this a case of Obama simply making it up as he goes along?
[Excerpt]
Read more:
Barack Obama
Of course had a Republican President done the same I'm sure Progressives would react the same and call for unity to back the President.
Who was the incompetent that handed Iraq in Iran's direction...ummmmm, begins with an O...no more hints, see if you can figure it out...Once G.W. Bush made up his mind to attack Iraq which was no threat to the USA he never wavered, he kept scratching around until he scraped up enough excuses to convince other pols to join his mad rush to war.
Take a look at the results. The USA gained nothing in Iraq, but lost a lot of American troops and treasure. Iran did gain a shia government in Iraq, so I guess that we can't say that the war was a total loss-it did help Iran.
"Better days are coming." ~ But not for today's out of touch, running out of time, GOP.
Who sane would have voted for Gore or Kerry...come on now....Lemme guess ... you voted for Bush?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?