"Bush did it first" and "Obama is black, therefore you're a racist" are apparently the only talking points Obama needs to repel attacks from the right. Pathetic.
Yes.
- Obama has the completely wrong way to go about improving healthcare;
- Obama fuels the fires of racism and class warfare instead of bringing an end to these social conflicts;
- Obama has embarrassed the country abroad with his apology ture and accepting the Nobel Peace Prize knowing he didn't earn it;
- Obama does not support private ownership of arms;
- Obama holds that born children are a punishment, not people.
- Obama is pro-choice.
- It's not that Obama is pro-ssm, it's that he doesn't care that half of those SSMs will end in divorce. He's just using people.
The conservative base portrays Obama as an "Anti-Christ" figure practically. Why is this? I personally don't find Obama to be half as bad as he is portrayed to be.
Very interesting post, I am alway curious about what the world thinks of us and why. Could you elaborate on exactly what obama did to restore your faith in America and exactly what Bush did to lose it in the first place and it would be informative to know what you thought of America when Clinton was pres, thanks.
The conservative base portrays Obama as an "Anti-Christ" figure practically. Why is this? I personally don't find Obama to be half as bad as he is portrayed to be.
It's because he is black.
There are more problems than free riders. Costs are running out of control, because there are no mechanisms to control costs. When the US went away from catastrophic health care insurance, mandated what insurance companies have to do, costs went out of control.The only way to fix health care is to make the free riders pay either through taxes or mandated insurance. Pro choice is places liberty above life. SSM is equal protection under the law. So some will end in divorce. Straight marriage ends in divorce too.
The only way to fix health care is to make the free riders pay either through taxes or mandated insurance.
Pro choice places liberty above life.
SSM is equal protection under the law. So some will end in divorce. Straight marriage ends in divorce too.
For me, there are two aspects to it, which are connected. The first is more objective, it's policy. The other is more objective, it's tone and style.
Maybe it's due to cultural differences, but Bush came across as extremely arrogant. His martialic speeches, his "cowboy rhetorics". On the policy side, I felt he had a sledgehammer approach to diplomacy. He treated even America's closest allies like vassals. Think of the famous "who is not with us, is against us" quote. In my ears, and that of many Germans, it sounds like "shut up and do what I say". Or when he kept referring to fighting a "crusade". First of all, since when were crusades a good thing? And second, have you any idea how that sounds in the ears of Muslims? Bush more or less confirmed all the ugly prejudices about America that exist here: Insensitive, self-centered, arrogant and a bit primitive.
The last straw was how Germans and the German government were treated by Bush, just because we opposed the Iraq war. It's not that opposing the war is an illegitimate position to take, many Americans did that too. But Bush fueled many ugly anti-European sentiments among Americans, think of the "Old Europe" label or the constant accusation of "anti-Americanism" -- as if hating Bush's policies equals hating America. Of course, former German Chancellor Schröder played his part too, he was hardly more diplomatic. But I think that was justified, he just showed Bush the mirror and replied in the same language Bush spoke.
Now Obama was a radical change in tone. Even before he was elected, he went to Berlin and held a moving speech that showed he understands Germans and Europeans and knows how they tick. (For Bush fans, even showing the slightest respect and interest in Europe is probably "kowtowing" already, a weakness, despite Germany being a close ally. Indeed Obama was attacked for it.) Obama did continue many of Bush's policies, but unlike Bush, he always coordinated his efforts with the European allies. He did not give up the UN and did not try to actively obstruct it as Bush did, but used it when it was helpful (despite all its flaws, the UN is important and stands for a different, more cooperative approach to international politics). For example, the mission in Libya found broad agreement in the UN.
Now Obama does and did many things I do not agree with. For example, he has even expanded many anti-terror laws which arguably violate civil rights. Obama is a politician I disagree with, but whom I respect. Bush, on the other side, does not live in the same world I live in. Probably not even on the same planet.
Bush's style was entirely America-centered, addressing those ignorant Americans who think Americans are better than non-Americans, who don't find Europe on a map. Who cares what the rest of the world thinks? We do what we want, and the ******s who disagree can go **** themselves. Obama acknowledges that there are more countries on this planet than just America.
Folks just have to pay for their own policies.
Exactly.
That's precicly the problem being ignored.
Yes people could just pay for own policies but many don't then they get sick or hurt go to the ER and don't pay. That raises costs in those that pay. A mandate for insurance, like in auto insurance, works.
Liberty above life us an American virtue. Live free or die and give me liberty or give me death are American phrases. That some percent if marriage will end in divorce is no reason to ban marriage.
Absolutly.
Killing people who are a mere inconvenience is not an American virtue. Liberty above life regards self-sacrifice.
I might be the smartest guy in class or the best athlete on the team but that doesn't mean I don't respect the other class geeks or athletes on the field. Bush showed little respect for anyone who opposed him. "My way or the highway" was his motto and it didn't apply just to other countries - many of his blind followers brought that attitude right into the workplace and the bars.What I am getting from this is your opinions on Bush vs Obama is more style than substance. I can actually see your point though, Bush had a way of speaking that was short and to the point, his diplomatic skills were somewhat lacking I admit. Obama on the other hand is a slick talker and everyone he speaks too comes away thinking they heard what they wanted to hear. Alot of us in America liked Bushes "cowboy rhetoric" as you put it, we call it straight talk. We also liked the way Bush acted like president of the USA not the world and put our interest above all other countries, in our opinion that was his primary responsibility but I can honestly see how you would prefer Obams approach. He seems to think America is more of a problem than a solution and it sometimes seems he is just as concerned with seeing Brazil do well as seeing his own country prosper. Old school Americans such as myself can sometimes feel "were the best, screw the rest" and I can see why you would find that annoying. I just call it patriotism. Again, I appreciate hearing your point of view though, thanks for responding.
First of all, I wonder what basis you have for saying that "the conservative base portrays Obama as an "Anti-Christ" figure practically". Do you have any links? Something that gives you this impression? Perhaps quotes from conservative politicians?
Bush showed little respect for anyone who opposed him. "My way or the highway" was his motto
- Obama fuels the fires of racism and class warfare instead of bringing an end to these social conflicts;
For me, there are two aspects to it, which are connected. The first is more objective, it's policy. The other is more subjective, it's tone and style.
Maybe it's due to cultural differences, but Bush came across as extremely arrogant. His martialic speeches, his "cowboy rhetorics". On the policy side, I felt he had a sledgehammer approach to diplomacy. He treated even America's closest allies like vassals. Think of the famous "who is not with us, is against us" quote. In my ears, and that of many Germans, it sounds like "shut up and do what I say". Or when he kept referring to fighting a "crusade". First of all, since when were crusades a good thing? And second, have you any idea how that sounds in the ears of Muslims? Bush more or less confirmed all the ugly prejudices about America that exist here: Insensitive, self-centered, arrogant and a bit primitive.
The last straw was how Germans and the German government were treated by Bush, just because we opposed the Iraq war. It's not that opposing the war is an illegitimate position to take, many Americans did that too. But Bush fueled many ugly anti-European sentiments among Americans, think of the "Old Europe" label or the constant accusation of "anti-Americanism" -- as if hating Bush's policies equals hating America. Of course, former German Chancellor Schröder played his part too, he was hardly more diplomatic. But I think that was justified, he just showed Bush the mirror and replied in the same language Bush spoke.
Now Obama was a radical change in tone. Even before he was elected, he went to Berlin and held a moving speech that showed he understands Germans and Europeans and knows how they tick. (For Bush fans, even showing the slightest respect and interest in Europe is probably "kowtowing" already, a weakness, despite Germany being a close ally. Indeed Obama was attacked for it.) Obama did continue many of Bush's policies, but unlike Bush, he always coordinated his efforts with the European allies. He did not give up the UN and did not try to actively obstruct it as Bush did, but used it when it was helpful (despite all its flaws, the UN is important and stands for a different, more cooperative approach to international politics). For example, the mission in Libya found broad agreement in the UN.
Now Obama does and did many things I do not agree with. For example, he has even expanded many anti-terror laws which arguably violate civil rights. Obama is a politician I disagree with, but whom I respect. Bush, on the other side, does not live in the same world I live in. Probably not even on the same planet.
Bush's style was entirely America-centered, addressing those ignorant Americans who think Americans are better than non-Americans, who don't find Europe on a map. Who cares what the rest of the world thinks? We do what we want, and the ******s who disagree can go **** themselves. Obama acknowledges that there are more countries on this planet than just America.
Still playing the race card, I see.And again the race card, and it's all obama's fault you have to play it...
Thanks for your input. I do agree that much of your post centered on style. I also agree that Bush's diplomatic skills was seriously lacking. Believe me, he pissed off a lot of American's too with his "my way or the highway" attitude.
But I should clarify my "kowtowing" comment. To me bowing/kowtowing is a sign of subservience. And no President of the US should ever be subservient to another country. And Obama did just that, bowed to a foriegn official (more than one actually). This is not to say that I don't think that other countries should be subservient to the President though, nor act like it. I believe that the ones that deserve it should be treated equally. The ones should not be imo are those countries that do not value freedom. Like Iran.
There are plenty of ways to treat other countries with respect without bowing to them.
Still playing the race card, I see.
Obama fuels the fires of racism and class warfare instead of bringing an end to these social conflicts;
Still playing the race card, I see.
Just as I was merely reacting to Obama's own policies which brought race into his administration.The poster was merely reacting to YOUR OWN post in which you brought race into this
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?