• 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!

King Obama....really?

opendebate

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 25, 2013
Messages
7,317
Reaction score
2,926
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
I think some might need a little reminder of the the crap Bush and Cheney (AKA the Penguin) pulled when they were in office-

After the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, the Bush/Cheney team saw an opening to free the presidency from checks and balances. They exploited the fear and insecurity that were pervasive at the time to claim emergency powers, creating offshore detention centers where prisoners were held without charge and eavesdropping on Americans without a warrant.

Mr. Bush’s signing statements not only amounted to a significant usurpation of power, but they came at a time when Congress was giving him everything he wanted. Congress passed the deeply flawed Patriot Act and authorized the invasion of Iraq. It even gave its retroactive approval to warrantless wiretapping. Mr. Bush also achieved many of his domestic policy goals, including tax breaks that mostly benefited the richest Americans.

The contrast with the Obama administration is stark.


http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/23/executive-overreach/?_r=0
 

Harshaw

Filmmaker ● Lawyer ● Patriot
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 1, 2005
Messages
38,750
Reaction score
13,844
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I think some might need a little reminder of the the crap Bush and Cheney (AKA the Penguin) pulled when they were in office-

After the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, the Bush/Cheney team saw an opening to free the presidency from checks and balances. They exploited the fear and insecurity that were pervasive at the time to claim emergency powers, creating offshore detention centers where prisoners were held without charge and eavesdropping on Americans without a warrant.

Mr. Bush’s signing statements not only amounted to a significant usurpation of power, but they came at a time when Congress was giving him everything he wanted. Congress passed the deeply flawed Patriot Act and authorized the invasion of Iraq. It even gave its retroactive approval to warrantless wiretapping. Mr. Bush also achieved many of his domestic policy goals, including tax breaks that mostly benefited the richest Americans.

The contrast with the Obama administration is stark.


http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/23/executive-overreach/?_r=0

What exactly do you think this op-ed says? I mean, all op-eds are opinion, but this one, even more than most. The "stark difference" he cites is basically "Republicans suck, so of course Obama's doing what he's doing. Bush was dealing with -- get this -- DEMOCRATS. He had no excuse."

Obama has continued every single onerous thing he cites Bush as doing, and in many cases, expanded on them. Obama's OK, according to this guy, because duh, it's OBAMA.

So, what's your line? Bush did it, so it makes everything OK? How about this? They were both wrong. But wasn't Obama supposed to put an end to all of that?
 

Sykes

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2013
Messages
1,296
Reaction score
1,066
Location
Mmm. Bacon.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I think some might need a little reminder of the the crap Bush and Cheney (AKA the Penguin) pulled when they were in office-

After the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, the Bush/Cheney team saw an opening to free the presidency from checks and balances. They exploited the fear and insecurity that were pervasive at the time to claim emergency powers, creating offshore detention centers where prisoners were held without charge and eavesdropping on Americans without a warrant.

Mr. Bush’s signing statements not only amounted to a significant usurpation of power, but they came at a time when Congress was giving him everything he wanted. Congress passed the deeply flawed Patriot Act and authorized the invasion of Iraq. It even gave its retroactive approval to warrantless wiretapping. Mr. Bush also achieved many of his domestic policy goals, including tax breaks that mostly benefited the richest Americans.

The contrast with the Obama administration is stark.


http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/23/executive-overreach/?_r=0

They're like baby trolls, trying to find the right button to push so they can scream what they always scream about blah-blah melting liberals, yada-yada, Messiah whatever - it gets old.
 

opendebate

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 25, 2013
Messages
7,317
Reaction score
2,926
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
They're like baby trolls, trying to find the right button to push so they can scream what they always scream about blah-blah melting liberals, yada-yada, Messiah whatever - it gets old.

And oh so predictable.
 

Sykes

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2013
Messages
1,296
Reaction score
1,066
Location
Mmm. Bacon.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
And oh so predictable.

FORTUNATELY, this board has people who are actively practicing critical thought, and they make up for the 'King Obama' brigade. ;)
 

Montecresto

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 9, 2013
Messages
24,561
Reaction score
5,507
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The point is that the office of the presidency is degenerating into something very bad. Partisan fingerprinting is foolish. People had best ban together as Americans first and address this problem or party infighting is going to truly be the least of concerns. Bush did do it, Obama's doing it worse and the next guy, well, this isn't difficult to predict.
 

Harshaw

Filmmaker ● Lawyer ● Patriot
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 1, 2005
Messages
38,750
Reaction score
13,844
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
And oh so predictable.

FORTUNATELY, this board has people who are actively practicing critical thought, and they make up for the 'King Obama' brigade. ;)

Neither of you seems to want to deal with the question -- Bush did it, so that makes it OK for Obama to do it? And if so, what made it wrong when Bush did it?

Putting together a little impromptu sniping party here is all well and good, but when do you plan to take a position?
 

opendebate

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 25, 2013
Messages
7,317
Reaction score
2,926
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
What exactly do you think this op-ed says? I mean, all op-eds are opinion, but this one, even more than most. The "stark difference" he cites is basically "Republicans suck, so of course Obama's doing what he's doing. Bush was dealing with -- get this -- DEMOCRATS. He had no excuse."

Obama has continued every single onerous thing he cites Bush as doing, and in many cases, expanded on them. Obama's OK, according to this guy, because duh, it's OBAMA.

So, what's your line? Bush did it, so it makes everything OK? How about this? They were both wrong. But wasn't Obama supposed to put an end to all of that?

The point is that, for many, I think their level of disgust is based on their feelings about the man more than his overreach while in office. I am not endorsing the act, and never said I did. Why do conservative "thinkers" have such a hard time picking up on nuance?
 

AngryOldGuy

double secret probation
Joined
Aug 3, 2013
Messages
2,917
Reaction score
658
Location
Phx,Az
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
yanno how when you open a thread and the majority of the posters have already earned a spot on your mental ignore list
and you only reading what two of the posters typed and then close the thread consigning it to the dustbin?
 

Harshaw

Filmmaker ● Lawyer ● Patriot
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 1, 2005
Messages
38,750
Reaction score
13,844
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
The point is that, for many, I think their level of disgust is based on their feelings about the man more than his overreach while in office. I am not endorsing the act, and never said I did. Why do conservative "thinkers" have such a hard time picking up on nuance?

Oh, I pick up on "nuance" just fine, and here, the "nuance" appears to be that it's easier to try to point out some kind of hypocrisy than deal with what's going on in the here and now.

You've been here, what, a couple of months? Bush has been out of office for 4.5 years. You have no idea what anyone around here said when Bush was in office. You're simply assuming, because you'd rather deal with what you think you can poke at Obama's critics than with what Obama is doing.

But Obama is actually the issue. So why won't you deal with that? No, it is not taken for granted that you don't approve of what he's doing; you have to say so -- and when you deflect to something else instead, well, it certainly makes your disapproval even murkier.

So, without equivocation -- is Obama overreaching his authority, and do you have a problem with it? Detail would be nice.
 

Dr. Chuckles

King Conspiratard
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 11, 2011
Messages
12,895
Reaction score
2,909
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
The point is that, for many, I think their level of disgust is based on their feelings about the man more than his overreach while in office.

there's more than a bit of irony here for the OP and people on both sides of the isle. Let's face it, most of you couldn't careless about actual policy, it's impact, or what it entails in the long term.

you just want to neaner people from the "other" side
 

Beaudreaux

Preserve Protect Defend
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
18,233
Reaction score
15,861
Location
veni, vidi, volo - now back in NC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
FORTUNATELY, this board has people who are actively practicing critical thought, and they make up for the 'King Obama' brigade. ;)

The part that gets me is the hypocrisy of the left and right. If it was Bush, the right says it was okay. If it was Obama, the left says it was okay. The left says: "But Bush did it, or worse!!" The right says: "Obama is ignoring the Constitution!!"

Either you're for limiting freedom's or your not. Either you're for reducing our exposure and increasing national security or your not. Neither of those statements are correct. There's a balance.

The truth is, Bush eroded our personal freedom's and Obama ran with it and expanded on it because he has the support of the majority of the media (Aren't they the ones that are supposed to warn us when this happens?) and is the messiah to many so he can do no wrong.

Both positions are sickening. Obama is neither the messiah or the devil. Bush was neither a savior of freedom nor the abolisher of our privacy rights.

Both are doing/did what they feel/felt was required to protect us from harm. Are/were they correct? Who knows. Because the programs are behind the curtain of "National Security" we may never know. The only facts that we have are that 1) there hasn't been a major coordinated attack on US soil since 9/11, and 2) although we hear about the "oh so bad" intrusions on our privacy, there hasn't been one case of a person being prosecuted for something that Big Brother found when looking at their emails or texts.

All this is, is something for people to give themselves their 15 minutes of fame with their ideologically similar group (insert name of blogger here), or for each political party to make points with the extreme element in their own party.
 
Last edited:

Harshaw

Filmmaker ● Lawyer ● Patriot
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 1, 2005
Messages
38,750
Reaction score
13,844
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
there's more than a bit of irony here for the OP and people on both sides of the isle. Let's face it, most of you couldn't careless about actual policy, it's impact, or what it entails in the long term.

you just want to neaner people from the "other" side

Yeah, that surely does appear to be the case, for both opendebate and Sykes.
 

Montecresto

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 9, 2013
Messages
24,561
Reaction score
5,507
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Boston was a pretty major attack on US soil, and an embassy is technically US soil.
 
Last edited:

opendebate

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 25, 2013
Messages
7,317
Reaction score
2,926
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
yanno how when you open a thread and the majority of the posters have already earned a spot on your mental ignore list
and you only reading what two of the posters typed and then close the thread consigning it to the dustbin?

Ohhhh, you honor me. :2wave:
 

sawyerloggingon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2011
Messages
14,697
Reaction score
5,704
Location
Where they have FOX on in bars and restaurants
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I think some might need a little reminder of the the crap Bush and Cheney (AKA the Penguin) pulled when they were in office-

After the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, the Bush/Cheney team saw an opening to free the presidency from checks and balances. They exploited the fear and insecurity that were pervasive at the time to claim emergency powers, creating offshore detention centers where prisoners were held without charge and eavesdropping on Americans without a warrant.

Mr. Bush’s signing statements not only amounted to a significant usurpation of power, but they came at a time when Congress was giving him everything he wanted. Congress passed the deeply flawed Patriot Act and authorized the invasion of Iraq. It even gave its retroactive approval to warrantless wiretapping. Mr. Bush also achieved many of his domestic policy goals, including tax breaks that mostly benefited the richest Americans.

The contrast with the Obama administration is stark.


http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/23/executive-overreach/?_r=0

Responding to a threat against America or over responding to it if that is what you believe is night and day to what king Obama is doing on immigration which is nothing more than playing politics with the American economy and attempting to stack the vote.
 

Beaudreaux

Preserve Protect Defend
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
18,233
Reaction score
15,861
Location
veni, vidi, volo - now back in NC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Boston was a pretty major attack on US soil, and an embassies is technically US soil.

Coordinated attack, Boston was not. It was a couple guys that fed on the propaganda. I was referring to within the borders of the US (you are correct that an Embassy or Consulate is US soil). And if we're not careful, there will be Extremist Leftists and/or Extremist Rightists that will be the next perpetrators. This continual hatred of "the other side" will lead to harm and death on a large scale. What's happening in Cairo right now is not impossible to happen here. WE ARE NO IMMUNE. And when it starts, it will get out of hand fast. So fast that by the time we realize it, it will be too late to stop it (Remember the rights in Compton or other similar events / source of riot is irrelevant more than the fact that it can happen). When the balloon goes up, and its based on political hatred, people die.
 

opendebate

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 25, 2013
Messages
7,317
Reaction score
2,926
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
The part that gets me is the hypocrisy of the left and right. If it was Bush, the right says it was okay. If it was Obama, the left says it was okay. The left says: "But Bush did it, or worse!!" The right says: "Obama is ignoring the Constitution!!"

Either you're for limiting freedom's or your not. Either you're for reducing our exposure and increasing national security or your not. Neither of those statements are correct. There's a balance.

The truth is, Bush eroded our personal freedom's and Obama ran with it and expanded on it because he has the support of the majority of the media (Aren't they the ones that are supposed to warn us when this happens?) and is the messiah to many so he can do no wrong.

Both positions are sickening. Obama is neither the messiah or the devil. Bush was neither a savior of freedom nor the abolisher of our privacy rights.

Both are doing/did what they feel/felt was required to protect us from harm. Are/were they correct? Who knows. Because the programs are behind the curtain of "National Security" we may never know. The only facts that we have are that 1) there hasn't been a major coordinated attack on US soil since 9/11, and 2) although we hear about the "oh so bad" intrusions on our privacy, there hasn't been one case of a person being prosecuted for something that Big Brother found when looking at their emails or texts.

All this is, is something for people to give themselves their 15 minutes of fame with their ideologically similar group (insert name of blogger here), or for each political party to make points with the extreme element in their own party.

Like I said before. This is not about finger pointing. The point is to remind everyone that it happens on both sides; if you recall the article does not shy away from the fact that Obama is doing it also. The justification that follows I'm sure will make the right froth at the mouth while some on the left will agree with it. If the roles were reversed I am certain righties would find some justification for what Bush and Cheney did that made it OK for them but not Ok for us. But really, it is not okay for anyone regardless of their party.

I share your thoughts about extremism and partisan bigotry believe it or not and this post is really targeting that issue. Perhaps I gave the readers too much credit for being able to figure that out.
 

Harshaw

Filmmaker ● Lawyer ● Patriot
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 1, 2005
Messages
38,750
Reaction score
13,844
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Like I said before. This is not about finger pointing.

Yes, it is, by your very next sentence:

The point is to remind everyone that it happens on both sides;

If it wasn't about "finger pointing," you wouldn't have to "remind" anyone of such a thing.

if you recall the article does not shy away from the fact that Obama is doing it also.

It gives Obama a pass, and you ended your own quotation from it with "The contrast with the Obama administration is stark." You, yourself, wanted to leave it with that impression.

But really, it is not okay for anyone regardless of their party.

If it's "not okay," then why can't Obama be criticized without invoking the sins of Bush? Obama is in the White House; Bush isn't.

So do tell the nature of your problems with what Obama did. What was the problem with it, and why was it wrong? See if you can answer it without a tu quoque deflection.
 
Last edited:

Beaudreaux

Preserve Protect Defend
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
18,233
Reaction score
15,861
Location
veni, vidi, volo - now back in NC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Like I said before. This is not about finger pointing. The point is to remind everyone that it happens on both sides; if you recall the article does not shy away from the fact that Obama is doing it also. The justification that follows I'm sure will make the right froth at the mouth while some on the left will agree with it. If the roles were reversed I am certain righties would find some justification for what Bush and Cheney did that made it OK for them but not Ok for us. But really, it is not okay for anyone regardless of their party.

I share your thoughts about extremism and partisan bigotry believe it or not and this post is really targeting that issue. Perhaps I gave the readers too much credit for being able to figure that out.

I think that at some times, a person's post or thread is judged based on the perceived purpose or meaning rather than the actual purpose or meaning. For instance, your title section to the left of your posts sates that you "Lean - Progressive" which to some paints everything you write. That is nothing but predetermination by association with the term Progressive. You and I don't agree on everything (we lean in opposite directions on certain issues and the same direction on others), but we agree on the most important parts and that allows us to debate each other with respect and an open mind.

IMHO, you are not the typical Progressive as defined by the extreme right. I hope that's not an insult to you.
 

Montecresto

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 9, 2013
Messages
24,561
Reaction score
5,507
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Coordinated attack, Boston was not. It was a couple guys that fed on the propaganda. I was referring to within the borders of the US (you are correct that an Embassy or Consulate is US soil). And if we're not careful, there will be Extremist Leftists and/or Extremist Rightists that will be the next perpetrators. This continual hatred of "the other side" will lead to harm and death on a large scale. What's happening in Cairo right now is not impossible to happen here. WE ARE NO IMMUNE. And when it starts, it will get out of hand fast. So fast that by the time we realize it, it will be too late to stop it (Remember the rights in Compton or other similar events / source of riot is irrelevant more than the fact that it can happen). When the balloon goes up, and its based on political hatred, people die.


Oh, I couldn't agree with you more on the left/right us/them struggle that's distracting from the reality that both parties are contributing to the demise of our republic. IMO Jimmy Carter is absolutely correct. For Boston, the brothers didn't coordinate anything?
 

Beaudreaux

Preserve Protect Defend
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
18,233
Reaction score
15,861
Location
veni, vidi, volo - now back in NC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Yes, it is, by your very next sentence:



If it wasn't about "finger pointing," you wouldn't have to "remind" anyone of such a thing.



It gives Obama a pass, and you ended your own quotation from it with "The contrast with the Obama administration is stark." You, yourself, wanted to leave it with that impression.



So do tell the nature of your problems with what Obama did. What was the problem with it, and why was it wrong? See if you can answer it without a tu quoque deflection.

And at what point has she done something others have not; redefined or clarified her position.

If we aren't capable of allowing people to evolve or to let them further describe their position, then we haven't debated but attacked.

Maybe she didn't mean it the way it read or the way you read it? Is that a possibility worthy of consideration?
 

Beaudreaux

Preserve Protect Defend
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
18,233
Reaction score
15,861
Location
veni, vidi, volo - now back in NC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Oh, I couldn't agree with you more on the left/right us/them struggle that's distracting from the reality that both parties are contributing to the demise of our republic. IMO Jimmy Carter is absolutely correct. For Boston, the brothers didn't coordinate anything?

Monte... My friend... Two guys planning something in one small city with two little backpack bombs is not a coordinated attack. It's just an attack. In my description, a coordinated attack would be across a large geographical area (like 9/11) effecting thousands of people (like 9/11) that has a long term adverse effect on the US economy (like 9/11).

That's was what I was referring to by coordinated attack. Yes, you and I can coordinate our posts, but that isn't a coordinated DDoS attack on this site. I hope this clarifies my use of the term, and thanks for the opportunity to do so.
 

opendebate

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 25, 2013
Messages
7,317
Reaction score
2,926
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
I think that at some times, a person's post or thread is judged based on the perceived purpose or meaning rather than the actual purpose or meaning. For instance, your title section to the left of your posts sates that you "Lean - Progressive" which to some paints everything you write. That is nothing but predetermination by association with the term Progressive. You and I don't agree on everything (we lean in opposite directions on certain issues and the same direction on others), but we agree on the most important parts and that allows us to debate each other with respect and an open mind.

IMHO, you are not the typical Progressive as defined by the extreme right. I hope that's not an insult to you.

I agree about the fact that how I identify myself taints how readers interpret my posts; I should really learn to explain my position better when I start a thread. I honestly give them more credit than that despite the fact that they refuse to see me they just see my political identifier. When will I learn? Maybe today.

In all honesty I feel like I see much more extremist behavior on the right then on the left. I really wish it was different because neither stance is perfect and needs to be kept in check by opposing opinions. A healthy right is needed by the left or we (the left) wind up doing the things we claim to oppose and loathe. Weshould balance either other; disagreeing but keeping our eye on solutions and compromise so that progress can be made.
 

Harshaw

Filmmaker ● Lawyer ● Patriot
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 1, 2005
Messages
38,750
Reaction score
13,844
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
And at what point has she done something others have not; redefined or clarified her position.

If we aren't capable of allowing people to evolve or to let them further describe their position, then we haven't debated but attacked.

Maybe she didn't mean it the way it read or the way you read it? Is that a possibility worthy of consideration?


It's a simple question she's decided to avoid answering.
 
Top Bottom