Mr. Obama

[Nimue1995 1]

I had a feeling you were a waste. That's call eentooeeshun.

Lol I had a feeling LMD that you wouldn't have an answer for an intelligent argument.

[Loismustdie 0]

Lol I had a feeling LMD that you wouldn't have an answer for an intelligent argument.

Oh my god you are dumb as a box of rocks, no joke. No disrespect, but did you even read his "arguments?" Completely worthless, with no real knowledge of anything. Now, I see that- the 2 posters above you see that as well- and while I know they are tenth level to your zero I still hold out hope that somehow for people such as yourself basic reading comprehension will kick in and you will get finally get it, but time and time again you fail miserably, and I really see no reason to pull punches- you fail, simple as that. For whatever reason, you look at issues, and see something completely different. It's almost as if you walk with blinders on, but I don't think it's that, I think it just comes down to some people smart, some not. No disrespect, though.

[Loismustdie 0]

That may have been harsh. I won't edit it though because it's an honest representation of how I feel about people like this.

[Loismustdie 0]

A man of his word.http://www.israpundit.com/2008/?p=1132

This will never be talked about in mainstream media. They just don't cater to smart people. If it can't be a sound bite, it can't run.

[LongLiveYorke 38]

"We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times ... and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK." -- Barack Hussein Obama, 2008 so much for that free country thing I guess

Hi.Your argument is horrible. It's not really an argument at all, actually, since you only cut and pasted a quote (poorly and out of context, by the way). But we're all intelligent enough to see what you were getting at. You believe that Barak saying that we as a nation should be more responsible with our resources somehow makes us less free. That's what you're saying, correct? (Actually, that's not really a questions since I know exactly what you're saying, I was just sarcastically pointing out the ridiculousness of your point by restating it in obvious terms. It's a decent device over the internet that I like to use from time to time). Or do you think that freedom means abusing ever last one of your freedoms to the extent of harming yourself, your country, and the world as a whole. Obama's doing exactly what a leader should be doing: leading. I truly hope the people of this country (and the world, of course) are intelligent enough with their natural resources to use them wisely and responsibly so that the government doesn't have to make laws to limit their use (you know, if we ever get to the brink of war or global disaster or some other apocalyptic scenario involving Mad Max or whatever).Good Luck.

[AmScray 355]

You believe that Barak saying that we as a nation should be more responsible with our resources somehow makes us less free.

When it comes to most resources, Science + Productivity > Conservation and Minimalism. He's preaching a well-intentioned but incorrect doctrine.

[Loismustdie 0]

Hi.Your argument is horrible. It's not really an argument at all, actually, since you only cut and pasted a quote (poorly and out of context, by the way). But we're all intelligent enough to see what you were getting at. You believe that Barak saying that we as a nation should be more responsible with our resources somehow makes us less free. That's what you're saying, correct? (Actually, that's not really a questions since I know exactly what you're saying, I was just sarcastically pointing out the ridiculousness of your point by restating it in obvious terms. It's a decent device over the internet that I like to use from time to time). Or do you think that freedom means abusing ever last one of your freedoms to the extent of harming yourself, your country, and the world as a whole. Obama's doing exactly what a leader should be doing: leading. I truly hope the people of this country (and the world, of course) are intelligent enough with their natural resources to use them wisely and responsibly so that the government doesn't have to make laws to limit their use (you know, if we ever get to the brink of war or global disaster or some other apocalyptic scenario involving Mad Max or whatever).Good Luck.

The argument is horrible because it shouldn't even have to be an argument. A leader should never take basic freedoms- like, eating how I like and driving what I like and maintaining my body temperature at the temp I like and then say: You can't. Ever. He can say,"This is how we accomplish what you like in a more effective way." THAT'S leading. I know you will know the difference now that I pointed out, because you are very smart.

[gobears 0]

When it comes to most resources, Science + Productivity > Conservation and Minimalism. He's preaching a well-intentioned but incorrect doctrine.

It's not either/or, we can have both.

The argument is horrible because it shouldn't even have to be an argument. A leader should never take basic freedoms- like, eating how I like and driving what I like and maintaining my body temperature at the temp I like and then say: You can't. Ever. He can say,"This is how we accomplish what you like in a more effective way." THAT'S leading. I know you will know the difference now that I pointed out, because you are very smart.

Extrapolating there? It'd be like me taking McCain's statement about being in Iraq for 100 more years, OMG, All those troops forever without looking at the context in which he said it. Commanders use different styles in getting their point across, Our President could have said, "This is how we will accomplish victory in Iraq in a more effective way" or he could say "BRING IT ON".

[AmScray 355]

It's not either/or, we can have both.

We don't necessarily need both.

[Loismustdie 0]

It's not either/or, we can have both. Extrapolating there? It'd be like me taking McCain's statement about being in Iraq for 100 more years, OMG, All those troops forever without looking at the context in which he said it. Commanders use different styles in getting their point across, Our President could have said, "This is how we will accomplish victory in Iraq in a more effective way" or he could say "BRING IT ON".

Except the context was/is/has been for awhile now from the Dem side that the U.S. is bad, our successes are also our failures as people, and we need to accept less so that others may have more, especially the middle class. I don't see Obama living on 60,000 a year, do you? Leaders lead by example, not by some dumbass statement when taken, even in context, is economic and social gobbledygook at best. The day Obama lives in a smaller home, drives smaller car, wears less expensive clothing made by his wife and grows his own ****ing corn then I will listen to that bullshit. Meanwhile, I will continue to work hard for what I earn and spend it as I ****ing please, 72 degrees and whatever I want to eat, I have EARNED it, EARNED that right,as a person EARNING a living.

[akoff 0]

Meanwhile, I will continue to work hard for what I earn and spend it as I ****ing please, 72 degrees and whatever I want to eat, I have EARNED it, EARNED that right,as a person EARNING a living.

well said!

[KramitDaToad 0]

Leaders lead by example, ... The day Obama lives in a smaller home, drives smaller car, wears less expensive clothing made by his wife and grows his own ****ing corn then I will listen to that bullshit.

The funny thing is you just made the exact same point Obama did.You used individuals, he used nations.(And I got to use ...)

[hblask 1]

The funny thing is you just made the exact same point Obama did. You used individuals, he used nations.

Individuals have free will and morality. Nations don't, they are an abstract notion. Politicians love to blur that distinction by pretending that the actions of a few leaders represents what "the nation" believes, but that's just egomania.

[KramitDaToad 0]

Individuals have free will and morality. Nations don't, they are an abstract notion. Politicians love to blur that distinction by pretending that the actions of a few leaders represents what "the nation" believes, but that's just egomania.

Irrelevant. DUCY?

[Nimue1995 1]

LMD you're a funny man. Really! Fact is that if you can afford it then yes you can do whatever you want even up to and including breaking the law. Does it make it the right thing to do? the prudent thing to do? NO. That's all Obama was saying. We need to start thinking about the doing the right thing. And now oil prices are forcing most Americans except the rich to do just that. Start rethinking all those extra automobile trips. But we could have prepared for this and had a softer landing instead of just consuming consuming consuming until we ended up landing hard on our butts. But then that's H's supply and demand thing going isn't it? :)Anyway, if you really want to do whatever you want then you have a lot in common with this guy:County investigates alleged floodplain violationsBy Michael HowellA dispute between Ravalli County and the founder of the Big Sky Coalition, Tom Robak, over his alleged violation of the Ravalli County Floodplain Regulations is likely headed to court, according to Robak. Robak has also been an outspoken opponent of the county’s efforts to establish streamside setback regulations. If the allegations prove true, Robak could be forced to remove a new home that is close to completion on property he owns along the West Fork of the Bitterroot River south of Darby.In December of last year Robak was notified by Ravalli County Floodplain Administrator Laura Hendrix that a Department of Natural Resources and Conservation official, while conducting routine site visits in the fall, had noticed construction of a new house and the placement of fill on his property. The construction and the placement of fill was confirmed by her department.County regulations prohibit most development within the mapped floodplain of the river. Although some development is allowed upon granting of a permit, the building of new houses and the placement of fill is prohibited. Since there was no floodplain permit issued for the property, and the house and fill were located within the mapped floodplain, Hendrix asked Robak to cease any work on his project.To accurately assess the location of the house and fill, Hendrix requested Robak to retain a professional land surveyor or engineer to complete an elevational survey of the property showing the location of the house and the fill as well as any other structures and detailed elevation points and contours of the natural ground surface throughout the property.A violation of the Floodplain Regulations may constitute a misdemeanor offense, with a maximum penalty of up to 10 days in the county jail and/or fines up to $100, for each day of the offense.Robak did respond with a survey of his property showing the house to be at least one foot above the floodplain.In April, however, Hendrix notified Robak that his response was insufficient. His survey did not reveal whether or not the home was built on fill that raised it above the natural elevation of the land or not. If that was the case, she wrote, then the construction and the fill would still be in violation of the regulations. She also requested again that he divulge how much fill he placed on the property and in what location.In response Hendrix received a letter from Robak’s attorney, Dustin Chouinard, stating that his client had indicated that the house was not placed on any fill and that the only fill placed on the property was in relation to the septic system. He asked her, if she disagreed, to supply the evidence for her contentions.Ravalli County Attorney Alex Beal responded, stating that county officials had seen significant amounts of fill placed on the property, much of which appears to be in the actual floodway, not just the floodplain. He noted that the surveys of the property show at least part of the house is also located in the floodway.“The placement of a home in the floodway is of significant concern to everyone,” wrote Beal. “Not only is there the great probability of the Robak house becoming inundated with flood waters, but there is the possibility the home could wash down stream and destroy other property.”He asked that Robak comply with Hendrix’s request.A civil engineering specialist for DNRC, Larry Shock, responded to a request from the county for an evaluation of the situation in a letter dated May 7. He noted that Robak had told him last December that he was aware of the designated floodplain on his property and had looked at a floodplain map in his realtor’s office before buying the property. Shock said that Robak told him at the time that he had not brought any fill onto the site but simply knocked down a “high spot” in order to construct a level building site.Shock noted, however, that Robak did not provide any elevational data indicating the construction was elevationally above the floodplain prior to starting work on the house. The only surveys provided were conducted after the construction was under way.Since Robak was aware of the floodplain maps and that they showed portions of his property were within the floodplain, writes Shock, “The fact that this narrow parcel is adjacent to the West Fork of the Bitterroot River and within the mapped 100 year floodplain should have at least indicated the need to gather additional information and/or proceed with caution when developing the site.” Therefore, Shock concludes, Robak appears to be in violation of the County’s floodplain regulations for failing to apply for a permit.Shock also notes that the survey provided by Robak’s own surveyor clearly shows that the house is located within the designated floodway. Since Robak was aware of all this, reasons Shock, he should have recognized the need to gather additional information before beginning construction. According to Shock, Robak appears to be in violation of both the County and State regulations prohibiting construction of a home in the designated floodway. He recommends that the violations be pursued and resolved in accordance with County Floodplain Regulations.According to Hendrix that would mean requiring Robak to remove the home and the fill from the floodway.Robak refused to comment to the Bitterroot Star on Monday under the advice of his attorney.Now if he gets flooded out, firemen, policemen and other volunteers will be out there risking their lives to protect his house. I hope that it gets washed away personally because the guy's a friggin' idiot.

[Loismustdie 0]

LMD you're a funny man. Really! Fact is that if you can afford it then yes you can do whatever you want even up to and including breaking the law. Does it make it the right thing to do? the prudent thing to do? NO. That's all Obama was saying. We need to start thinking about the doing the right thing. And now oil prices are forcing most Americans except the rich to do just that. Start rethinking all those extra automobile trips. But we could have prepared for this and had a softer landing instead of just consuming consuming consuming until we ended up landing hard on our butts. But then that's H's supply and demand thing going isn't it? :)Anyway, if you really want to do whatever you want then you have a lot in common with this guy:County investigates alleged floodplain violationsBy Michael HowellA dispute between Ravalli County and the founder of the Big Sky Coalition, Tom Robak, over his alleged violation of the Ravalli County Floodplain Regulations is likely headed to court, according to Robak. Robak has also been an outspoken opponent of the county’s efforts to establish streamside setback regulations. If the allegations prove true, Robak could be forced to remove a new home that is close to completion on property he owns along the West Fork of the Bitterroot River south of Darby.In December of last year Robak was notified by Ravalli County Floodplain Administrator Laura Hendrix that a Department of Natural Resources and Conservation official, while conducting routine site visits in the fall, had noticed construction of a new house and the placement of fill on his property. The construction and the placement of fill was confirmed by her department.County regulations prohibit most development within the mapped floodplain of the river. Although some development is allowed upon granting of a permit, the building of new houses and the placement of fill is prohibited. Since there was no floodplain permit issued for the property, and the house and fill were located within the mapped floodplain, Hendrix asked Robak to cease any work on his project.To accurately assess the location of the house and fill, Hendrix requested Robak to retain a professional land surveyor or engineer to complete an elevational survey of the property showing the location of the house and the fill as well as any other structures and detailed elevation points and contours of the natural ground surface throughout the property.A violation of the Floodplain Regulations may constitute a misdemeanor offense, with a maximum penalty of up to 10 days in the county jail and/or fines up to $100, for each day of the offense.Robak did respond with a survey of his property showing the house to be at least one foot above the floodplain.In April, however, Hendrix notified Robak that his response was insufficient. His survey did not reveal whether or not the home was built on fill that raised it above the natural elevation of the land or not. If that was the case, she wrote, then the construction and the fill would still be in violation of the regulations. She also requested again that he divulge how much fill he placed on the property and in what location.In response Hendrix received a letter from Robak’s attorney, Dustin Chouinard, stating that his client had indicated that the house was not placed on any fill and that the only fill placed on the property was in relation to the septic system. He asked her, if she disagreed, to supply the evidence for her contentions.Ravalli County Attorney Alex Beal responded, stating that county officials had seen significant amounts of fill placed on the property, much of which appears to be in the actual floodway, not just the floodplain. He noted that the surveys of the property show at least part of the house is also located in the floodway.“The placement of a home in the floodway is of significant concern to everyone,” wrote Beal. “Not only is there the great probability of the Robak house becoming inundated with flood waters, but there is the possibility the home could wash down stream and destroy other property.”He asked that Robak comply with Hendrix’s request.A civil engineering specialist for DNRC, Larry Shock, responded to a request from the county for an evaluation of the situation in a letter dated May 7. He noted that Robak had told him last December that he was aware of the designated floodplain on his property and had looked at a floodplain map in his realtor’s office before buying the property. Shock said that Robak told him at the time that he had not brought any fill onto the site but simply knocked down a “high spot” in order to construct a level building site.Shock noted, however, that Robak did not provide any elevational data indicating the construction was elevationally above the floodplain prior to starting work on the house. The only surveys provided were conducted after the construction was under way.Since Robak was aware of the floodplain maps and that they showed portions of his property were within the floodplain, writes Shock, “The fact that this narrow parcel is adjacent to the West Fork of the Bitterroot River and within the mapped 100 year floodplain should have at least indicated the need to gather additional information and/or proceed with caution when developing the site.” Therefore, Shock concludes, Robak appears to be in violation of the County’s floodplain regulations for failing to apply for a permit.Shock also notes that the survey provided by Robak’s own surveyor clearly shows that the house is located within the designated floodway. Since Robak was aware of all this, reasons Shock, he should have recognized the need to gather additional information before beginning construction. According to Shock, Robak appears to be in violation of both the County and State regulations prohibiting construction of a home in the designated floodway. He recommends that the violations be pursued and resolved in accordance with County Floodplain Regulations.According to Hendrix that would mean requiring Robak to remove the home and the fill from the floodway.Robak refused to comment to the Bitterroot Star on Monday under the advice of his attorney.Now if he gets flooded out, firemen, policemen and other volunteers will be out there risking their lives to protect his house. I hope that it gets washed away personally because the guy's a friggin' idiot.

Hi. How does a guy being an idiot run parallel to the idea that I should be able to live my life as I can afford to? It doesn't. I really wanted to feel bad about how harshly I came down on you but I just can't do it. Seek help.

[JustDoIt 10]

LMD you're a funny man. Really! Fact is that if you can afford it then yes you can do whatever you want even up to and including breaking the law. Does it make it the right thing to do? the prudent thing to do? NO. That's all Obama was saying. We need to start thinking about the doing the right thing. And now oil prices are forcing most Americans except the rich to do just that. Start rethinking all those extra automobile trips. But we could have prepared for this and had a softer landing instead of just consuming consuming consuming until we ended up landing hard on our butts. But then that's H's supply and demand thing going isn't it? :)Anyway, if you really want to do whatever you want then you have a lot in common with this guy:County investigates alleged floodplain violationsBy Michael HowellA dispute between Ravalli County and the founder of the Big Sky Coalition, Tom Robak, over his alleged violation of the Ravalli County Floodplain Regulations is likely headed to court, according to Robak. Robak has also been an outspoken opponent of the county’s efforts to establish streamside setback regulations. If the allegations prove true, Robak could be forced to remove a new home that is close to completion on property he owns along the West Fork of the Bitterroot River south of Darby.In December of last year Robak was notified by Ravalli County Floodplain Administrator Laura Hendrix that a Department of Natural Resources and Conservation official, while conducting routine site visits in the fall, had noticed construction of a new house and the placement of fill on his property. The construction and the placement of fill was confirmed by her department.County regulations prohibit most development within the mapped floodplain of the river. Although some development is allowed upon granting of a permit, the building of new houses and the placement of fill is prohibited. Since there was no floodplain permit issued for the property, and the house and fill were located within the mapped floodplain, Hendrix asked Robak to cease any work on his project.To accurately assess the location of the house and fill, Hendrix requested Robak to retain a professional land surveyor or engineer to complete an elevational survey of the property showing the location of the house and the fill as well as any other structures and detailed elevation points and contours of the natural ground surface throughout the property.A violation of the Floodplain Regulations may constitute a misdemeanor offense, with a maximum penalty of up to 10 days in the county jail and/or fines up to $100, for each day of the offense.Robak did respond with a survey of his property showing the house to be at least one foot above the floodplain.In April, however, Hendrix notified Robak that his response was insufficient. His survey did not reveal whether or not the home was built on fill that raised it above the natural elevation of the land or not. If that was the case, she wrote, then the construction and the fill would still be in violation of the regulations. She also requested again that he divulge how much fill he placed on the property and in what location.In response Hendrix received a letter from Robak’s attorney, Dustin Chouinard, stating that his client had indicated that the house was not placed on any fill and that the only fill placed on the property was in relation to the septic system. He asked her, if she disagreed, to supply the evidence for her contentions.Ravalli County Attorney Alex Beal responded, stating that county officials had seen significant amounts of fill placed on the property, much of which appears to be in the actual floodway, not just the floodplain. He noted that the surveys of the property show at least part of the house is also located in the floodway.“The placement of a home in the floodway is of significant concern to everyone,” wrote Beal. “Not only is there the great probability of the Robak house becoming inundated with flood waters, but there is the possibility the home could wash down stream and destroy other property.”He asked that Robak comply with Hendrix’s request.A civil engineering specialist for DNRC, Larry Shock, responded to a request from the county for an evaluation of the situation in a letter dated May 7. He noted that Robak had told him last December that he was aware of the designated floodplain on his property and had looked at a floodplain map in his realtor’s office before buying the property. Shock said that Robak told him at the time that he had not brought any fill onto the site but simply knocked down a “high spot” in order to construct a level building site.Shock noted, however, that Robak did not provide any elevational data indicating the construction was elevationally above the floodplain prior to starting work on the house. The only surveys provided were conducted after the construction was under way.Since Robak was aware of the floodplain maps and that they showed portions of his property were within the floodplain, writes Shock, “The fact that this narrow parcel is adjacent to the West Fork of the Bitterroot River and within the mapped 100 year floodplain should have at least indicated the need to gather additional information and/or proceed with caution when developing the site.” Therefore, Shock concludes, Robak appears to be in violation of the County’s floodplain regulations for failing to apply for a permit.Shock also notes that the survey provided by Robak’s own surveyor clearly shows that the house is located within the designated floodway. Since Robak was aware of all this, reasons Shock, he should have recognized the need to gather additional information before beginning construction. According to Shock, Robak appears to be in violation of both the County and State regulations prohibiting construction of a home in the designated floodway. He recommends that the violations be pursued and resolved in accordance with County Floodplain Regulations.According to Hendrix that would mean requiring Robak to remove the home and the fill from the floodway.Robak refused to comment to the Bitterroot Star on Monday under the advice of his attorney.Now if he gets flooded out, firemen, policemen and other volunteers will be out there risking their lives to protect his house. I hope that it gets washed away personally because the guy's a friggin' idiot.

That's all Obama was saying.We don't need Obama to tell us what we need to do. What we need to hear from Obama is real solutions for Medicare, Social Security and other pressing issues. So far all we have heard from Obama is how John McCain is going to take everyones Social Security away. Have I heard this before? Oh Yeah........Every election Democrats use this despicable tactic to scare seniors. But we could have prepared for this and had a softer landingCorrect, Congress including Obama could have just done their job and things would have been much better.The rest of your post is Bizarre.

[Loismustdie 0]

That's all Obama was saying.We don't need Obama to tell us what we need to do. What we need to hear from Obama is real solutions for Medicare, Social Security and other pressing issues. So far all we have heard from Obama is how John McCain is going to take everyones Social Security away. Have I heard this before? Oh Yeah........Every election Democrats use this despicable tactic to scare seniors. But we could have prepared for this and had a softer landingCorrect, Congress including Obama could have just done their job and things would have been much better.The rest of your post is Bizarre.

This is what drives me crazy- why is it that time and time again we need to point out that congress has done a shit job? And, bizarre is a perfect word to describe it. Well done.

[LongLiveYorke 38]

We don't need Obama to tell us what we need to do. What we need to hear from Obama is real solutions for Medicare, Social Security and other pressing issues. So far all we have heard from Obama is how John McCain is going to take everyones Social Security away. Have I heard this before? Oh Yeah........Every election Democrats use this despicable tactic to scare seniors.

I really don't understand this. Yes, Obama certainly should be discussing his plans about Medicare, SS, etc etc. But, as a potential leader, shouldn't he also be able to discuss how he would lead beyond the creation of laws? I think the president has responsibilities beyond those directly given to the executive office. The President is the leader of the people and it is his job in certain cases to do just that.Lois, simply because you CAN do something doesn't mean that you SHOULD do something. Even in a free society, people should be encouraged to be responsible. It appears that you are offended at the notion of somebody asking you to be responsible, which is a bit rediculous. Just because something fits in your mouth doesn't mean you should put it there.

[checkymcfold 0]

I really don't understand this. Yes, Obama certainly should be discussing his plans about Medicare, SS, etc etc. But, as a potential leader, shouldn't he also be able to discuss how he would lead beyond the creation of laws? I think the president has responsibilities beyond those directly given to the executive office. The President is the leader of the people and it is his job in certain cases to do just that.Lois, simply because you CAN do something doesn't mean that you SHOULD do something. Even in a free society, people should be encouraged to be responsible. It appears that you are offended at the notion of somebody asking you to be responsible, which is a bit rediculous. Just because something fits in your mouth doesn't mean you should put it there.

this is a really good post that speaks to the real crux of the issue, esp the bolded part. to go a little further, i might extrapolate a bit from the first paragraph (and respond to henry earlier) and say that there is significant symbolic value in any somewhat fictional term like "leader," "nation," or "president" or whatever. indeed, possibly the only real value of things like those words are their symbolic meaning to whatever sort of audience they encompass/speak to. but--and here's the real thing i'm getting at--if you really understand the function of symbolic meaning and use it properly (as i would suggest obama does), then you can be a far more admirable leader than someone who either doesn't understand how leadership works in that way or misuses it. for instance, i would argue that talking about the US as leading the world by example is actually helpful in a concrete way, whereas talking about the US being "the last great hope for humanity" (which bush did on monday in a speech) or "the police of the world" kind of does precisely what lois is so miffed about as he misunderstands what obama's saying. where obama is talking about leading in a true sense, and inspiring others to do the right thing without telling them to outright, talking about the US as the world's boss is actually doing exactly what lois seems to hate--leading by force (read: annihilating freedom) and not by inspiring the desire in others to do the right thing.

[Loismustdie 0]

this is a really good post that speaks to the real crux of the issue, esp the bolded part. to go a little further, i might extrapolate a bit from the first paragraph (and respond to henry earlier) and say that there is significant symbolic value in any somewhat fictional term like "leader," "nation," or "president" or whatever. indeed, possibly the only real value of things like those words are their symbolic meaning to whatever sort of audience they encompass/speak to. but--and here's the real thing i'm getting at--if you really understand the function of symbolic meaning and use it properly (as i would suggest obama does), then you can be a far more admirable leader than someone who either doesn't understand how leadership works in that way or misuses it. for instance, i would argue that talking about the US as leading the world by example is actually helpful in a concrete way, whereas talking about the US being "the last great hope for humanity" (which bush did on monday in a speech) or "the police of the world" kind of does precisely what lois is so miffed about as he misunderstands what obama's saying. where obama is talking about leading in a true sense, and inspiring others to do the right thing without telling them to outright, talking about the US as the world's boss is actually doing exactly what lois seems to hate--leading by force (read: annihilating freedom) and not by inspiring the desire in others to do the right thing.

This is what I absolutely love about people that love Obama right now. You read all of that into his shtick? Wow. I guess I am just not that easily impressed. Look, the truth is I want substance, this guy has none. Bush- none. McCain-some. Clinton-some. The truth is this- it's all talk, and even the talk is porous at best. The man has done absolutely nothing. I wouldn't go so far as to say he is a fraud but I will go so far as to say you guys are borderline delusional for reading meaning into his words. I guess I understand the disconnect though, and why people like me have been missing out. It's not what he is saying, what he is saying is symbolic of something else, which is nice, symbolism is good. Of course, Obama doesn't seem to think so unless it's time to slap on a turban.

[checkymcfold 0]

This is what I absolutely love about people that love Obama right now. You read all of that into his shtick? Wow. I guess I am just not that easily impressed. Look, the truth is I want substance, this guy has none. Bush- none. McCain-some. Clinton-some. The truth is this- it's all talk, and even the talk is porous at best. The man has done absolutely nothing. I wouldn't go so far as to say he is a fraud but I will go so far as to say you guys are borderline delusional for reading meaning into his words. I guess I understand the disconnect though, and why people like me have been missing out. It's not what he is saying, what he is saying is symbolic of something else, which is nice, symbolism is good. Of course, Obama doesn't seem to think so unless it's time to slap on a turban.

just because you don't understand the value of symbols doesn't mean that "it's all talk." what i'm saying is that if you actually pay attention better, there is plenty of substance to what he's saying. just because it's not "kill towelheads," and "SUVs are the shit" doesn't mean that it's not there, as you seem to think is the case. personally, i find it quite sad that "people like [you]" are so committed to misunderstanding nuance and policies that take the longview into account as "just talk."

[Loismustdie 0]

I really don't understand this. Yes, Obama certainly should be discussing his plans about Medicare, SS, etc etc. But, as a potential leader, shouldn't he also be able to discuss how he would lead beyond the creation of laws? I think the president has responsibilities beyond those directly given to the executive office. The President is the leader of the people and it is his job in certain cases to do just that.Lois, simply because you CAN do something doesn't mean that you SHOULD do something. Even in a free society, people should be encouraged to be responsible. It appears that you are offended at the notion of somebody asking you to be responsible, which is a bit rediculous. Just because something fits in your mouth doesn't mean you should put it there.

Define responsible. Define freedom. Where does it stop? Where does it begin? I already work a compressed work week, 3 days back to back, my wife carpools to her job, we keep our house at 75 to 76, she makes me recycle, we try and go to the store twice a week instead of 2. I may convert one of our cars to natural gas, because it might be a responsible move for my family. What should I do next? Should I work back to back 18 hours and cut it down to 2 days? Should I walk my kid to school instead of drive?Should I get rid of cable, the 2nd car, keep the house at 80 and use dial up,shop at goodwill,have my wife tend a garden and quit her job so we leave less of a "carbon footprint"? How about I control my breathing so I exhale less? I do my part. Many, many people do there part, as much as they realistically can. I will not be made to feel like I am somehow less of a human because I can afford steak. I will not choose a leader that dares to say "We can't eat whatever we want." Really? THAT'S your message? "Well, sure, in America you can live a life of prosperity, but that doesn't mean you should. Success is not responsible, success is evil." The difference between you and I is when I watch the news I don't feel guilt when I see those that are lesser off. I don't. I wish all people all of the best, but reality says this- we won't all be a success. It's impossible. There will be hungry people, our best efforts will never eliminate that. There will always be impending doom from the science angle- so far, it hasn't happened. So far, the earth seems to keep on chugging. The ozone layer was the big thing 20 years ago, what happened to that? Oops. USA for Africa was huge, what happened to that? There is literally tragedy and sadness all over the world, there will always be. History never shows utopia, history always shows chaos, there is no way to bring utopia on, man as an entity will never allow it. Thousands upon thousands of years or recorded history shows societal ebbs and flows and no one learns. As soon as we stop trying to grow, trying to excel, guess what happens? Someone else will fill that void, and prosperity will be a lost idea, at least for us.

[Loismustdie 0]

just because you don't understand the value of symbols doesn't mean that "it's all talk." what i'm saying is that if you actually pay attention better, there is plenty of substance to what he's saying. just because it's not "kill towelheads," and "SUVs are the shit" doesn't mean that it's not there, as you seem to think is the case. personally, i find it quite sad that "people like [you]" are so committed to misunderstanding nuance and policies that take the longview into account as "just talk."

Are you kidding me? I have listened to every speech, watched every debate, watched him be thrown softballs and him swing weakly and dribble it foul. Do you have any idea what he plans to do? What are his actual plans? Nobody ****ing knows, and when he does let you peek behind the curtain, what he suggests is plain idiotic and lacks understanding of the world at large. I have a problem with that.

[checkymcfold 0]

Are you kidding me? I have listened to every speech, watched every debate, watched him be thrown softballs and him swing weakly and dribble it foul. Do you have any idea what he plans to do? What are his actual plans? Nobody ****ing knows, and when he does let you peek behind the curtain, what he suggests is plain idiotic and lacks understanding of the world at large. I have a problem with that.

ffs, read the policy section of his website you lazy twat. or ask me, i'd be glad to distill it for you if that's tough. our own founding fathers knew that democracy fails when the electorate refuses to educate themselves.