Obama

Taz responds to me:

quote:

---

Then according to your argument, capitalism is a failed system also, since most self sustained capitalist systems that have ever existed eventually went bellied up.

---

This goes into the point I made before: There is no such thing as a "pure" system. Even countries we would nominally call "socialist" follow capitalist processes for a lot of their economic output. The United States, a shining example of "capitalism," is rife with "socialist" structures.

quote:

---

How many times do I have to repeat myself?

---

Until you start reading the replies. Then you can come up with something new. Until then, you can keep spinning the merry-go-round and you'll keep getting the same refutations of your original claims.

quote:

---

Russia went straight from little better than a feudal system to communist.

---

Right...the Industrial Revolution just passed Moscow right on by. You might have a case for China where agricultural industries were the main until the 60s. But again, we're getting into the issue of no such thing as a "pure" system. While they are quite heavily communist, they have been engaging in some capitalist processes and there is some privatization...though with the new leadership, they have been reverting back to a more regulated system (and reversing their economic gains in the process).

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

---

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

Yeah, he can recommend things to Congress. So can I, all I need to do is stand on the Hill with a placard.It's not really power, is it?Perhaps I overstate the case, but I don't see how the President can get the legislature to do things they don't want to do without offering them something they want. The wants of the Republican Party are few and simple, and since they don't need Obama's help to pick up strangers in public restrooms, that really only leaves tax cuts for people who don't need them.In return, they'll let the Democrats do something that might actually be useful.As Winston Churchill sagely remarked, democracy is the worst possible political system except for all the others.

Dr Adequate responds to me:

quote:

---

Yeah, he can recommend things to Congress. So can I, all I need to do is stand on the Hill with a placard.

​

It's not really power, is it?

---

When you do it, no. After all, what are you gonna do about it if they don't listen to you?The President, on the other hand, has much more power. With a national stage and executive powers under his belt, he can make life unpleasant for members of Congress.Again, have you forgotten about Jeffords?Not to mention the fact that the President has the power of a veto. If Congress tries to send him a bill he doesn't like, if those of his party don't work to try and shape the bills to match his agenda, then those bills won't get turned into law and those Congresscritters will not have talking points to take back home during election time.And then there's the fact that the President is a de facto leader of the party. If the President gets upset with certain folks within the party, support from the party will become harder and harder to find.

quote:

---

Perhaps I overstate the case, but I don't see how the President can get the legislature to do things they don't want to do without offering them something they want.

---

Indeed. What makes you think the President has nothing to offer? That Congress doesn't want anything from him?

quote:

---

As Winston Churchill sagely remarked, democracy is the worst possible political system except for all the others.

---

I haven't said otherwise.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

---

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

Sure, he can stop them from doing what they want. Or he can stop stopping them. Which means that when he wants something, his bargaining point is that he might let them do what they want, in exchange for them doing something that he wants. Which is what appears to have happened. I specifically pointed out what they want: tax cuts for the rich and anonymous gay sex.I'm not sure what else they want. Maybe Obama could exterminate an endangered species for them?Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

Like the middle class?- Oni

Have you forgotten about Mitch McConnell? The only thing the Republicans want from Obama is nothing. Jeffords had a legislative priority which Bush held a knife to. The lesson the Republicans have learned from that is that having positive legislative priorities is a weakness - they can be held hostage to ensure your compliance, and as the minority party all of your legislative successes will be ascribed to the majority. The only thing they want from Obama is to block anything that could be construed as a legislative success, because the majority party is the only party that voters will credit with success (because Americans operate under the delusion that Congress works by majority rule.)If you've failed to remember that this Senate has used the filibuster more than any other Senate in American history, that the 60 vote requirement for the passage of legislation can be instituted by a single Senator, and that this isn't the Congress of 2001 that contained 50 Democrats and 50 Republicans (and thus a single senator changing parties represented a substantial swing in influence) then you've failed to recognize the critical context, here. Breaking ranks with Republicans to be the 58th vote for cloture is worthless, same with the 59th, because all that gets you is a Tea Party primary challenge. Now you're getting it! The only thing Republicans want from Obama is nothing. Of the Democratic party. And more importantly - the Democratic party determines leadership by seniority, not by appointment as the Republicans do. That's one less lever the leader of the DNC has over his party, which is why party discipline is so much higher among Republicans - the Republicans actually have rules that enforce it, and Democrats don't. And the President can neither change those rules nor change the precedent. Have you forgotten about Leiberman?Edited by crashfrog, : No reason given.

You are a dishonest liar Pops. My original postS clearly showed that the SIZE of the embassy was the issue I had. When you continued to play dumb, I specifically re-addressed this point.Again, how proud your parents must be Pops. (The apple must not fall far from the tree.)(Let me know when "liberal" Obama signs an executive order that stops extraordinary extradition and child torture.)

No, that's not accurate.

quote:

---

Obama has NOT withdrawn ALL troops from Iraq. He has re-labeled "combat-troops" with "counter-insurgency personal." 50,000 US troops are STILL in Iraq. I note you didn't respond to the 100,000 mercenary troops, PERMANENT bases, or MASSIVE US embassy.

---

quote:

---

The US "embassy" in Iraq is the largest in the world, the size of the vatican, and is not going anywhere.

---

Did you write those words, or did you not? Obviously you expressed a concern about the size, but that makes no sense as a complaint about Obama since it's already built. Obama didn't design the embassy, Obama didn't construct the embassy, and Obama didn't vote for the war that provided the excuse for the embassy. The size of the embassy can't really be what you're talking about because that has nothing to do with the Obama administration.The only thing you could possibly be blaming Obama for is that Obama hasn't torn down the embassy, and why would he do that? That makes no sense. "Pops"? I still don't get it. That's pretty typically classless. I guess we've all learned how you reply when someone proves you wrong.Edited by crashfrog, : No reason given.

It seems you dishonestly ommited one of my posts. Here's BOTH of them: AND, even when I corrected your wrongful notion in the other thread, you continue to spout garbage/lies in this thread.Curiously, you even admitted that I OBVIOUSLY wrote about the size: (Still not addressing Obama's "liberal" support of Child Torture huh? Didn't think so)

You're just proving me right. Did you write those words, or not? Please explain why you expect Obama to close the US embassy in Iraq. I never said that you never complained about the size. But your complaint is that the embassy has not been closed. Why would it be? We don't close embassies in allied countries. Why would we cease diplomatic relations with Iraq?Edited by crashfrog, : No reason given.Edited by crashfrog, : No reason given.

Pops,Even if I was to give you the benefit of the doubt that my original posts (Message 14 and Message 20) were unclear, I DID follow up with the following post to clearly show that your fanciful interpretation of my posts was indeed wrong:Message 59 (Message 59) 12-03-10 After all this, less than a week later, you CONTINUE to falsely assert that I want the embassy withdrawn:Message 40 of 85 (Message 40) 12-09, Funny, you have abundant time to use dishonest and obfuscating debating tactics, but when it comes to addressing serious points like extraordinary extradition and CHILD TORTURE, you can't spare a word. Just the sound of crickets.Run away Pops, run away, your parents are so proud.Edited by AdminPD, : Msg Links

But again - Obama didn't build the embassy, design the embassy, or create the war that provided the opportunity for the embassy. The only extent to which Obama is relevant to the objectionable size of the embassy is the extent to which Obama has not knocked down the embassy already.And why would he close the embassy? You continue to pretend like that's not what you want him to do, but your complaint continues to be "the embassy isn't going anywhere."Did you, or did you not write those words? You quoted them yourself in this very thread. So explain why Obama should be expected to close the embassy in Iraq? It's not false. You've repeatedly stated that Obama should close the giant embassy. But why should be be expected to do that? You refuse to say.Everybody knows what you're saying, drone. Your English is perfect. Your words are not unclear in any way. Your complaint is that Obama has not yet closed the giant embassy on account of it's hugeness. But why on Earth would anybody expect him to do something so stupid? You refuse to say.

Repeatedly? Therapists are doing wonders with shock therapy these days Pops. Perhaps you're not such a bad guy afterall. Maybe someday, some advanced team of Viennese therapists will prove this hunch.Seriously, if your parents raised an honest and ethical person, you would NOT continue to write that I have REPEATEDLY stated that Obama should CLOSE the giant embassy. Instead you would honestly write that I have repeatedly stated that Obama has not ENDED the illegal and immoral Iraqi invasion like he "liberally" campaigned. And I gave supporting evidence . . . The ridiculous size (the embassy's 104 acres is six times larger than the United Nations compound in New York!) of the US embassy is clearly NOT for diplomatic reasons. This is yet another Bush Jr. illegal and immoral hegemony policy that will continue under the Obama Administration. If Bush Jr. wasn't a liberal, than Obama continuing to support Bush Jr. policies also makes Obama . . . NOT a liberal. Sayth the man who refuses to address extraordinary rendition and Child Torture. Keep running Pops, keep running. Edited by dronester, : "rendition"

Crashfrog dies horribly in his own words with: BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHITCite. Cite. You cannot cite.Get your act together, man.

---

- xongsmith, 5.7d

What are you fucking insane? The dude has repeatedly told you it was the size of the embassy that was his concern."And it's not going anywhere" while vague as to the meaning should have been cleared up when he specifically said, it was the size I was concerned about.For fuck sakes, its a good thread lets not start acting like a bunch of bitches now and ruin it.- Oni