Guiliani's Opinions on Obama

[tytlyf]

Rudy just makes it up like the rest of the clown show.

 

[LuisDantas]

I am suppose ti be impressed you think Rudy is "nonsense"?

No. I am just telling you that I am impressed that you do not see it that way.

I almost envy whatever enables you to.

Almost.

I truly couldn't bring myself up to emulate you in that respect to save my life.

Ahhh no. Not. He is exceptional in what he says.

"Exceptional" is one way of putting it. And we all should be grateful for that.

And I hope he says more... And I hooe this lame campaign attacking such common dinner table conversations continue. Even more Americans will become suspicious of THAT then Rudy.

I do hope so as well. Since this undercurrent does exist in American politics, better to let it run through its course sooner rather than later.

 

[1robin]

It's just amazing that you seemingly know how feels and thinks that goes well beyond anything he has said that would indicate in any way that you're right. The disciple Paul stated that he knows not what goes on in his "innermost mind", but yet you claim to know what goes on in someone else's.

I think what I said included the words "it seemed or seems" specifically to imply I am making a deduction. I don't care how he feels. I care what he is destroying and it seems I and many others have arrived at the same conclusion about his motive.

I was watching "Morning Joe" today, and Joe Scarborough, former Republican representative from Florida, said that Guiliani should "Just shut up!" as he's an embarrassment. MIchael Steele, former RNC chairman, said this morning that it is statements like Guiliani's that badly hurt the party.

We no longer have a conservative party, the whole nation has started to lean to the secular, liberal, and opposite direction from what made this nation great to begin with. There are a few conservatives around but in general the parties are liberal and liberal light. It is no longer a question of if we will destroy ourselves in the process (I think it has already occurred), now it is only a matter of which party will destroy us slower. If Reagan had made the statement above it might mean something to me. What 80% of Republicans think these days does not.

So, he's an "anti-colonialist"? Gee, I wish all countries and people were.

Have you never heard of this, it has been a very well established theory since 06-07, and has been confirmed in every possible way.

1. At times colonialism is very bad and deserves to be opposed, many other times it is overall very beneficial. Even in a bad case like India they were better off under British rule than without it. For all Britain's ills it gave them stability, economic opportunity, and military protection. Gandhi for all the right reasons did exactly the wrong thing and plunged the whole nation into civil war. The Muslims were wiping out the Indians before Britain arrived, and recommenced doing so after they left.
2. Even if you rightly resent colonialism IMO Obama has mistakenly wrapped up the US in a western colonial ideal without cause.

He has a "hatred of western democracy"? Really? Is that why he went into constitutional law?

I do not know but it very well may be. All tacticians seek to know their enemy and a modern phenomena seems to be to conquer from within.

He is a "subtle tyrant"? And how exactly is he a "tyrant", especially when so many on the right blame him for not being militarily aggressive enough?

The technical term is soft tyranny. It is an offensive from within not a military take over. Even a man is wrong, if a man, will fight you outright. When whipped will admit the mistake. Cowards try and defeat you from within. I can run the laundry list of actions and quotes of his defying the constitution, surrounding himself with those who seek to transform the traditional US, resenting our allies, and helping our enemies but they are to numerous and well known to need to post.

Me thinks you've got some rather serious problems here.

I think of all US Presidents this to be by far (and I mean far) the easiest case in which to back up my claims.

 

[1robin]

No words

None necessary, nor none would be permitted if we had not stopped two empires bent on silencing you.

I absolutely despise the rhetoric republicans like Giuliani use. The whole idea of American exceptionalism is not only factually *bleeping* wrong, but it's inherently discriminatory. Wait, also damaging because it causes us to do stupid things abroad.

That is not an argument, it is yelling at traffic. If you put these mere declarations into the form of an argument. A specific claim with at least a hint of evidence then we may accidentally get a debate out of this.

 

[1robin]

What, 1robin, why don't you tell us what you really feel? Why not a word about what football team Obama roots for? Why are you protecting him?

I do not get alerts when you post without quoting me. It was blind luck I happen to see my name in your post.

I don't know what any of that means. It had nothing to do with anything I said.

On a more serious note, I think you are being quite certain on a lot of rather questionable judgements. Also, while I am disappointed with Obama, I can hardly recognize in him this borderline monster you describe - or at least, no more of that than in many of his immediate predecessor.

Well which claim do you want evidence for?

But what most surprises me is your certainty that the USA is some sort of benevolent nation rebuilder. That looks a lot like self-serving revisionism to me.

I gave examples, you did not. In fact you did not present evidence anything I said was inaccurate in anyway. I don't know what to defend because you didn't attack anything in particular.

 

[Sunstone]

Guiliani who?

 

[ShivaFan]

Colonialism came into this thread, it has a long history of problems. But it happens by all peoples at different levels and means and opportunity, it just isn't called "colonialism", be it Native "Indians" descending down from Canada in the 1200s and then again in the 1600s and wiping out the Anasazi and other fish and gathering cultures in America in a holocaust by these invaders who took to horses and wiped them out, the newcomers becoming the Navahos and Apache colonialists killing buffaloes as hunters instead of the original fishing and gathering cultures they murdered or sent on death marches.

But this colonial thing, the word has been used to excuse the most vicious mass murders. I remember seeing some Dutch based public news special on a PBS channel paid by US taxpayers where the leftist idiots on the program were calling Saloth Sar (Pol Pot) a "great anti-colonialist", this was just before the Khmer Rouge took over Cambodia and then killed and murdered almost half the entire population of Cambodia in one of the most horrific "self-holocausts" imaginable in the name of socialism and nationalism, on par with what ISIS is going to do if it continues. ISIS is commiting a holocaust on more (good) Muslims than Christians right now, another "self-holocaust" that will in it's own time turn into a holocaust of all who are not them and is the current face of colonialism in realtime.

But back on subject, I urge Rudy and others to not only be vocal about Obama not loving America, but it is time to reopen the cover up of Obama's past, his socialist and communist influences, and even more important his influences from zealot religious cults. This post inspired me to start firing off emails to representatives the other day urging this, as well as to great Americans such as Donald Trump. I sure hope he enters into the campaign just to poke the eye of that toadie of Wall Street Hillary Clinton.

I think this "We have to respect the office of the President" game has gone on too long, and for the last several decades has really meant the phony liberal news, the leftist professors who are way over paid for being narrow-minded and useless ideologues, the socialist and communist Democratic Party and the obese government class and unelected bureacrats and budget junkies of tax collectors can without impunity insult, lie about, and threaten the life of any Republican President all day long while "respect the office" is only a proxy to stiffle the free speech of anyone saying the most common, obvious and truthful opinions of an out of control, despotic and liar Democrat President and "respect" is turned into an excuse to try and intimidate or arrest the well informed of society so that the peasants are all low information crowd or fearful otherwise.

I am glad Giuliani is saying what is obvious and is challenging this "respect for the office" one-way street, and folks are sick of this far left crap that the far left is trying to use to straight jacket the constitutional rights of Americans who will find this assault and disrepect of America's most beloved Mayor just another assault on their own free speech by those who really want a tyranny and totalitarian central government.

Of course Obama was and is obviously influenced by the dingbat (and in some cases terrorist) socialists and communists and Jew haters and a motley set of freaky Islamic religious cults and murderers and bomb throwers that surrounded him in life, covered for him, lied for him, payed for his college and gave him freebies and acclaims and certificates and papers for being a good "anti-colonialist blaming white America", and who he went off to hang with in Pakistan at a time Americans were restricted to travel to, and whom he shook hands with.

This is the guy who prior to the phony campaign of lies and cover ups of his past run by leftsts and the phony liberal news, prior to being elected but already a "community activist" and fund raiser for the blame America crowd, in 1995, along with his Jew-hater buddy Al Sharpton, Barack Obama hooked up with the Islamic extremist cult of Farrakhan in the Million Man March on Washington. It was there that Obama met and shook hands with one of Farrakhsn's top security guys at the "Million" MAN march (another example of the long standing left-Islamic extremist alliance's War On Women), John Allen Muhammad. The same John Allen Muhammad who hooked up with the 17 year old black racist punk from Jamaica, Lee Boyd Malvo, to go on a killing spree of whites, police officers, and random terrorist attacks in the name of Jihad and Islam where they murdered what we now know were over 30 people, both prior to and during the 2002 D.C. Sniper terrorism, who we now know actually had two more "Islamic soldiers" (one of which Muhammad murdered for being "chicken" at the trigger) planning to set off a massive terrorist bomb at the funeral of the police officer they were targeting as part of their al-Qaeda / Nation of Islam ("black muslim") inspired terrorist attacks. They were trying to form a terrorist operation of black muslims in a safe haven in Canada where they would continue further repeated attacks in the US and in Ottowa.

Obscure. After all, in 1995 Obama hadn't yet started his first Chicago based STATE (Illinois state, not US senate) senate campaign on it's feet much less a national figure, he was obscure to the obscure person he shook hands with and neither knew each other anymore than a hole in the wall. Neither knew each other, two ships passing in the night.

Now one could say, how would Obama have known? Obama has shook hands with all sorts as President or campaigning, including the most disgusting despots of Africa.

But he wasn't President then. He was just another far left and Islamo-fascist sympathizer hanging out like "birds of a feather" with the extremist Rev. Wright, domestic hate groups such as the Nation of Islam who were telling people a giant mother ship flying saucer was going to land in a field in a Chicago suburb to take black people off into space while the flying saucer "kills all the blue eyed demons with the death ray" as it ascends into the sky.

So in one way, what did Obama think these people are capable of, and why did he like them so much?

His past is not only the socialist, communists, and Afro-centric loons that have influenced him but scary and freaky Islamic religious cults and bizarre "Christian revolutionary" churches, loud mouth Jew haters and basically his background is hanging with zealots.

Let free speech rule!

 

[LuisDantas]

I don't know what to defend because you didn't attack anything in particular.

I hope you do not expect me to spend so much energy challenging such a collection of undeserving claims. But I also hope you do not mistake that to some sort of acknowledgement of their merit, either.

Truth is, other than by the insistence of those claims, I would have no way and no means to even attempt to take them at all seriously.

 

[1robin]

I hope you do not expect me to spend so much energy challenging such a collection of undeserving claims. But I also hope you do not mistake that to some sort of acknowledgement of their merit, either.

I wish you had spent whatever time you did refuting the claims instead of complaining about them. If your debating me the idea you do not agree is a given, what is not given is why your right. That is what you need to post.

Truth is, other than by the insistence of those claims, I would have no way and no means to even attempt to take them at all seriously.

Then why respond. I don't think unicorns exist. I don't respond to posts claiming they do, I live my life as if they do not exist. I especially do not respond that unicorns don't exist without providing a reason for that view and then claim I did not provide evidence because I could take the claim seriously. I am at a loss as to what your doing.

 

[LuisDantas]

I wish you had spent whatever time you did refuting the claims instead of complaining about them.

What, you think they deserve that much effort?

You are wrong. You should be thankful I spend as much as I did already. In part, because they are somewhat funny.

 

[1robin]

What, you think they deserve that much effort?

You are wrong. You should be thankful I spend as much as I did already. In part, because they are somewhat funny.

Why should I be thankful you wrote posts that required 20 minutes to read that basically said "Nu-uh"? After three posts I have no idea what claim it is you even disagree with. You seem to be making general complaints not arguments. Please do me no favors here, if you do not have any actual reasons that anything I said was wrong then don't bother posting anything.

 

[metis]

I think what I said included the words "it seemed or seems" specifically to imply I am making a deduction. I don't care how he feels. I care what he is destroying and it seems I and many others have arrived at the same conclusion about his motive.

If Obama is intent on "destroying" the U.S., he's certainly going about it in a rather funny manner. Unemployment is down, the stock market is at it's highest point ever, millions more Americans now have health insurance, corporate profits are at an all time peak, etc. Seems to me we need more of this supposed "destruction" rather than less.

We no longer have a conservative party, the whole nation has started to lean to the secular, liberal, and opposite direction from what made this nation great to begin with.

There are many factors that made America great, and to claim that it's supposedly being "conservative" is bizarre. Let me remind you that the conservative view prior to the American Revolution was to stay with England and the monarchy and to have the official church be the Anglican church, and that's just for starters.

1. At times colonialism is very bad and deserves to be opposed, many other times it is overall very beneficial.

Which country really wants to run by another? Would you suggest that the U,S. be taken over by Mexico if the latter were to be more powerful? You know you wouldn't, so whom are you really trying ti kid here?

The technical term is soft tyranny. It is an offensive from within not a military take over. Even a man is wrong, if a man, will fight you outright. When whipped will admit the mistake. Cowards try and defeat you from within.

So, Obama is trying to defeat the U.S. from within? You really believe that? Again, the word "bizarre" comes back to mind.

I can run the laundry list of actions and quotes of his defying the constitution, surrounding himself with those who seek to transform the traditional US, resenting our allies, and helping our enemies but they are to numerous and well known to need to post.

The issue of violation of the Constitution is up for grabs, and we will see what the SCOTUS says, even though I'm not too optimistic since 5 justices seem to make decisions more on partisan politics than on even on past practice, such as we saw in the Citizens United case.

Secondly, our allies are generally far more along with what Obama's been doing than with they were with "W" according to many polls. And exactly how is Obama helping our enemies? That's such a bizarre claim.

BTW, were you in favor of "W's" Patriot Act, whereas even the AG under Bush realized that they were probably violating the Constitution and eliminated parts of it.

I think of all US Presidents this to be by far (and I mean far) the easiest case in which to back up my claims.

No, I think that someone else well summed your claims: "bizarre". And I betcha voted for Bush but are so blind that you can't even begin to see the damage he did to this country.

 

[1robin]

If Obama is intent on "destroying" the U.S., he's certainly going about it in a rather funny manner. Unemployment is down, the stock market is at it's highest point ever, millions more Americans now have health insurance, corporate profits are at an all time peak, etc. Seems to me we need more of this supposed "destruction" rather than less.

One at a time.

1. Unemployment is actually up in the first month of 2015. Regardless, despite not counting those that have given up even looking for work as unemployed for some reason and having spent trillions trying the lower the unemployment rate (and it is quite bizarre that the amount of money could have employed every out of work person in the US for years if actually used for that purpose) is still currently higher than in the same month of 05, 06, 07 and even 08.
Bureau of Labor Statistics Data
2. The stock market is not among those things I understand well. It is to full of fuzzy math for me to investigate. However a quick look at returns since 1900 shows that. It was higher in the 50's, 80's, and 90's than it is currently.
3. I should millions of more Americans do have insurance than previously since they have been forced to buy it or be fined and the rest of us have been forced to pay for it. Too bad these things must be paid for. There is a great trap in politics. Those who get elected are those who promise to give those who elect them things. These things continue to pile up until there is no money left to pay for them because few get elected on the promise to take them away. They keep adding cargo to the ship until they sink it. I don't know why your bragging about another load of cargo placed on a ship who deck is already awash. Many economic scholars suggest the affordable care act is the worst piece of legislation in American history.
4. I am not an economics major. I hate the subjective and contrived issues involved. I prefer the common sense things more resistant to tricky math. The mean household income is down, for the first time in 17 years my company said they could not afford a bonus this year. Our national debt has almost doubled since Obama was elected, our nations credit rating has been lowered during his term in office, those who have dropped out the workforce all together is at near record levels, the percentage of those on government assistance for the first time in our history has exceeded those who contribute to it. Our total unfunded liabilities now exceeds the amount of money in existence in the entire world, our total debt now exceeds GDP, and the publically held debt now exceeds 75% of GDP. 85% of our grown in spending is now entitlement expenditures and interest payments on the debt. I don't care what color we keep borrowing money to paint the house in, the foundation is dissolving.

There are many factors that made America great, and to claim that it's supposedly being "conservative" is bizarre. Let me remind you that the conservative view prior to the American Revolution was to stay with England and the monarchy and to have the official church be the Anglican church, and that's just for starters.

What conservative means has changed over time. I am not going to saddle the Democrats with the racial oppression of even the last century, why are you going to try and weigh down a party that did not even exist 3 centuries ago.

What made this nation great are factors more often associated with the Republican party (conservative than the democratic party (or liberals). Keep in mind both have evolved over the years so I am talking about a moderately modern definition of them:

1. Strong national defense. Usually cut by democrats and added to by republicans.
2. Individual liberty. Usually defended by Republicans, and attacked by Democrats.
3. Traditional, faith based morality. Again the same, God has actually been removed from the democratic party platform all together.
4. Economic responsibility. Neither side has done a god job here. However the Democrats have been spending like drunken sailors. I don't think anything can repair the damage at this point. Our last hope is our natural resource reserves, but I guarantee you we will not use them to pay of our debt but will only use them to fund increases in the same self destructive habits we have had since FDR.

Which country really wants to run by another? Would you suggest that the U,S. be taken over by Mexico if the latter were to be more powerful? You know you wouldn't, so whom are you really trying to kid here?

I am no monetary expert, but I am certainly competent in military history. Many nations have asked us to intervene and even take over. The Philippines being an example and France being another. We are of course expected to spend blood and capitol freeing those people but expected to leave and as soon as they have what wanted and unlike many other nations we have generally done so. Countless citizens of tyrannized nations have fervently prayed the US would deliver them and in many cases we have done so. No other major nation in history has ever fought for the benefit of so many other as the US has. Your wrong, I like tens of millions who if they lived under complete tyranny would chose foreign intervention. Regardless I do not know why you mention the US taking over places, the majority of our wars have been at the request of other nations, as a result of being attacked, and have usually ended with the nation being warred against being rebuilt, protected, and eventually given complete independence.

So, Obama is trying to defeat the U.S. from within? You really believe that? Again, the word "bizarre" comes back to mind.

Depends on what you mean by defeat. He does not want the traditional US to survive as is but does not intend to directly confront the US, heck even parasites suffer if they kill the host. What he wants to do is transform this nation into something it is not, this is why he is always issuing executive orders, butting up against the constitution, and circumventing congress. Our founders had learned the lessons of history well. They devised a system that resist change because they knew every step forwards is usually accompanied by several backwards. The problems are always the same because the human condition is the same. It was about the best system possible to limit corruption but eventually the corrupt destroy all systems. If not directly by confronting then by eroding them from within. Lincoln was correct in saying "We shall nobly save, or meanly lose, the last best hope of earth. "

The issue of violation of the Constitution is up for grabs, and we will see what the SCOTUS says, even though I'm not too optimistic since 5 justices seem to make decisions more on partisan politics than on even on past practice, such as we saw in the Citizens United case.

The clarity with which Obama has challenged the Constitution, delegated powers, and our traditions certainly has more clarity than voodoo mathematics involved in the stock market. I do agree that justices and other authorities are currently redefining the US and violating the will of the people. I think the liberal mindset responsible as a whole. I do not suggest Obama is unique, liberalism seeks to subvert our traditions on all levels. Obama just happens to be the liberal ion Chief and the subject of this thread. Reid Clinton and countless lesser officials are just as committed as he.

Secondly, our allies are generally far more along with what Obama's been doing than with they were with "W" according to many polls. And exactly how is Obama helping our enemies? That's such a bizarre claim.

You are actually claiming our relations with Britain and Israel are better these days, our situation in Iraq and Afghanistan is brighter, we made the right decision concerning the Arab spring, etc.... Now if you merely want poll numbers then fine. Obama's approval numbers on foreign policy are at record lows, 34%, his economic numbers at less than 30% approval, his job disapproval rating at 51%, his health care approval is a mean of about 40% approval. I don't think opinion polls are helpful for your claims. I also do not think they are necessarily accurate so I have not given them until you mentioned them here. He is no a very popular president and the last election proved that unmistakably.

BTW, were you in favor of "W's" Patriot Act, whereas even the AG under Bush realized that they were probably violating the Constitution and eliminated parts of it.

Is this a Bush versus Obama contest? I do not know the legality of the Patriot act. If you can show it unconstitutional I would denounce those aspects of it.

No, I think that someone else well summed your claims: "bizarre". And I betcha voted for Bush but are so blind that you can't even begin to see the damage he did to this country.

I see the Bush bashing is style in vogue. He has not been in office for 6 years, get over it.

 

[McBell]

Well, here we go again:

The former New York mayor, speaking in front of the 2016 Republican presidential contender and about 60 right-leaning business executives and conservative media types, directly challenged Obama’s patriotism, discussing what he called weak foreign policy decisions and questionable public remarks when confronting terrorists.

“I do not believe, and I know this is a horrible thing to say, but I do not believe that the president loves America,” Giuliani said during the dinner at the 21 Club, a former Prohibition-era speakeasy in midtown Manhattan. “He doesn’t love you. And he doesn’t love me. He wasn’t brought up the way you were brought up and I was brought up through love of this country.”

With Walker sitting just a few seats away, Giuliani continued by saying that “with all our flaws we’re the most exceptional country in the world. I’m looking for a presidential candidate who can express that, do that and carry it out.”...

“What country has left so many young men and women dead abroad to save other countries without taking land? This is not the colonial empire that somehow he has in his hand. I’ve never felt that from him. I felt that from [George] W. [Bush]. I felt that from [Bill] Clinton. I felt that from every American president, including ones I disagreed with, including [Jimmy] Carter. I don’t feel that from President Obama.” -- Rudy Giuliani: President Obama doesn’t love America - Darren Samuelsohn - POLITICO


Thoughts?

He is welcome to his opinions.

I just wonder if he will have the balls to stand behind his voicing his opinions or if he will whine about the backlash.

 

[metis]

One at a time.

1. Unemployment is actually up in the first month of 2015. Regardless, despite not counting those that have given up even looking for work...

First of all, why do you have to write essays when simple responses will do in most cases? You seemingly have the mindset that it you throw enough dung against the wall some of it might actually stick.

As far as the above, you completely avoid the reality that all unemployment figures are for comparison's sake, and the fact of the matter is that we have made a slow but steady recovery, which is ahead of what's happening in Europe and Asia.

2. The stock market is not among those things I understand well. It is to full of fuzzy math for me to investigate. However a quick look at returns since 1900 shows that. It was higher in the 50's, 80's, and 90's than it is currently.

Again, you're avoiding the fact that the market is at its highest point and is significantly higher than what Obama inherited, so only people like you can distort things to make a good appear to be bad.

3. I should millions of more Americans do have insurance than previously since they have been forced to buy it or be fined and the rest of us have been forced to pay for it...These things continue to pile up until there is no money left to pay for them because few get elected on the promise to take them away. They keep adding cargo to the ship until they sink it. I don't know why your bragging about another load of cargo placed on a ship who deck is already awash. Many economic scholars suggest the affordable care act is the worst piece of legislation in American history.

You are not paying for anyone else's insurance, but you sure were paying for those before the ACA who flooded emergency rooms who didn't have insurance, and those numbers are significantly down, btw. Also, the medical inflation rate is a fraction of what it was before as the average rate between 1998 and 2008 was roughly 9%. The last figure I saw on the current rate was that we were at 1 & 1/2% medical inflation, but I don't know what it is right now.

But you miss an important point, namely that 11 million and counting more Americans now have medical insurance, and I would suggest that the health of our fellow Americans is worth more than an increase in medical costs. So, to you, which is more important?

What conservative means has changed over time. I am not going to saddle the Democrats with the racial oppression of even the last century, why are you going to try and weigh down a party that did not even exist 3 centuries ago.

The "Southern Democrats" are now overwhelmingly Republicans, especially because of the Voting Rights Act of 1964. And also let me add that your Baptist churches in a major way had much to do with racial discrimination, backing slavery, Jim Crow Laws, and having significant numbers, including some Baptist pastors, in organizations like the KKK, the American Protective Society, the Know-Nothing Party, etc. It's one major reason why blacks formed their own Baptist churches.

Regardless I do not know why you mention the US taking over places, the majority of our wars have been at the request of other nations, as a result of being attacked, and have usually ended with the nation being warred against being rebuilt, protected, and eventually given complete independence.

That wasn't the point, so all that you have done here is to create a straw-man. The issue was "anti-colonialism", and your attempt to attach the above segment of your post to me is truly disingenuous.

The clarity with which Obama has challenged the Constitution, delegated powers, and our traditions certainly has more clarity than voodoo mathematics involved in the stock market.

Many of our presidents "challenged" the Constitution, and there's no "voodoo mathematics" in our dealing with the stock market, so again all you seem interested in creating nonsensical straw-men. The numbers are what they are, but you misrepresenting what the numbers are actually telling us is where the "voodoo mathematics" can be found.

You are actually claiming our relations with Britain and Israel are better these days, our situation in Iraq and Afghanistan is brighter, we made the right decision concerning the Arab spring, etc...

Our relations are better with the Brits, and Shimon Peres I have personally heard on three different occasions say that Israel has received more military help from this administration than any other. However, obviously Obama and Netanyahu don't get along well at all, as was the relationship between George H.W. Bush and Netanyahu whereas the latter wouldn't even talk to him after a while.

Is this a Bush versus Obama contest?...
I see the Bush bashing is style in vogue. He has not been in office for 6 years, get over it.

Well, I pretty much anticipated that this was coming, and let me "commend" you for your utter blatant hypocrisy. If you looked up above what you wrote, you mentioned about the Democrats past, but now that the shoe is on the other foot, you whine.

You invent stories to blame Obama for all sorts of bizarre things, but we're not supposed to point out the fact that there's been significant improvement since Bush? Your Obama-bashing is fine and dandy with you, but if someone even mention so many things are better now than with Bush, that's not fine and dandy? What hypocrisy.

Unlike you, I've not been bashing a president, nor questioning even his patriotism, the latter of which is about as unethical as one could be. Unlike you, I've not twisted good things to try and make them look bad. Unlike you, I don't put money ahead of the well-being of Americans. Unlike you, I don't twist the subject like you did with the "anti-colonialism" issue so as to create a straw-man. Unlike you, I didn't derail the thread so the Guiliani-based OP became an attack on Obama instead.

So, I'm going back to the topic here, and you can post whatever you want to post about Obama, but then don't you dare whine if someone derails any thread you start.

 

[metis]

He is welcome to his opinions.

I just wonder if he will have the balls to stand behind his voicing his opinions or if he will whine about the backlash.

I agree, and plenty of backlash is even coming from some in his own party that don't want to be seen as bigots.

I think the question is why did Guiliani do this, and earlier I said that I thought it might be an attempt to galvanize his base, but now I'm leaning in another direction, although I don't know if it's right. I think he might be using the "squeaky- wheel" approach, thus trying to make himself look more important than what he really is-- ala Trump. After all, here's a guy whom many thought was a shoe-in for the 2008 election, but between his mouth and his past, he ended up dropping out and gradually slipping into relative oblivion. Now people are talking about him, and as the saying goes, "bad publicity is better then no publicity at all".

 

[1robin]

First of all, why do you have to write essays when simple responses will do in most cases? You seemingly have the mindset that it you throw enough dung against the wall some of it might actually stick.

As far as the above, you completely avoid the reality that all unemployment figures are for comparison's sake, and the fact of the matter is that we have made a slow but steady recovery, which is ahead of what's happening in Europe and Asia.

It is funny how you always claim to have been offended by some remark yet your the only one who makes offensive statement like the above. I was going to say the exact same thing as you kept throwing everything but the kitchen sink into the conversation. I even typed it twice but thought I would be more civil and instead responded to each of your claims. You ever notice how people always suspect others are doing what they themselves do? Thieves always think someone is stealing from them, racists think everyone is being racist, and those who are offensive towards others always are complaining of others being offensive. Anyway, don't throw out dozens of claim without evidence unless you want responses to them with evidence. You can fit half a dozen assertions in a sentence but you can't disapprove them in a paragraph.

Comparison with what? is this going to devolve into a Bush bashing contest. I guess Obama is always going to be better than something somewhere, I can't predict what your going to compare him to.

Again, you're avoiding the fact that the market is at its highest point and is significantly higher than what Obama inherited, so only people like you can distort things to make a good appear to be bad.

What does that even mean? I tried to look up, I found dozens of ways of measuring the market and dozens of explanations for it that had little to do with Obama.

You are not paying for anyone else's insurance, but you sure were paying for those before the ACA who flooded emergency rooms who didn't have insurance, and those numbers are significantly down, btw. Also, the medical inflation rate is a fraction of what it was before as the average rate between 1998 and 2008 was roughly 9%. The last figure I saw on the current rate was that we were at 1 & 1/2% medical inflation, but I don't know what it is right now.

Oh come off it, the government does not pay for anything it's self and it does not offer anything that does not cost money. If my taxes are not paying for it, what is? Are there special money printers just for medical insurance? I looked into it to make sure, taxes are definitely part of what is funding Obama care. Since you want me to post less I will see your inflation and raise you a premium cost. As a percentage of annual income health care premiums were 12% 2000 and are now 24%, and I will throw in a percentage of Americans putting off treatment because of cost. It was 19% in 2000 and 33% currently.

But you miss an important point, namely that 11 million and counting more Americans now have medical insurance, and I would suggest that the health of our fellow Americans is worth more than an increase in medical costs. So, to you, which is more important?

I find this liberal tactic detestable. To claim financial responsibility is to be against another health or discriminatory is detestable. I wish we had the economic power to grant everyone free health care, a free house, a free car, we could import everyone else poor, and supply the world food requirements. We don't. Loading cargo on a ship is a great idea until that cargo finally sinks it and it no longer has the ability to carry anything.

The "Southern Democrats" are now overwhelmingly Republicans, especially because of the Voting Rights Act of 1964. And also let me add that your Baptist churches in a major way had much to do with racial discrimination, backing slavery, Jim Crow Laws, and having significant numbers, including some Baptist pastors, in organizations like the KKK, the American Protective Society, the Know-Nothing Party, etc. It's one major reason why blacks formed their own Baptist churches.

And you accuse me of throwing anything at the wall I can find. How is condemning all the Baptist churches I apparently own and did not know it, the KKK, or calling democrats republicans a defense of Obama.

That wasn't the point, so all that you have done here is to create a straw-man. The issue was "anti-colonialism", and your attempt to attach the above segment of your post to me is truly disingenuous.

Was it? What does the stock market have to do with that or Obama? You made some bizarre point about whether I would want another nation to take me over. I responded to it.

Many of our presidents "challenged" the Constitution, and there's no "voodoo mathematics" in our dealing with the stock market, so again all you seem interested in creating nonsensical straw-men. The numbers are what they are, but you misrepresenting what the numbers are actually telling us is where the "voodoo mathematics" can be found.

The stock market was where I found more claims of voodoo mathematics than any point you made. I actually spent an hour trying to find a consensus view on the stack market. I couldn't. I either found Obama has miracled it into the greatest thing that ever had occurred, it is a bubble that is about to explode like Clinton's and Carter's housing bubble, or was prospering in spite of Obama. Every site I checked (and it was several dozen had a unique take on it). One place where the math is a problem is that the federal rates are said to be the main influence, IOW you can literally create a false temporary gain in the markets by artificially setting interest rates.

Our relations are better with the Brits, and Shimon Peres I have personally heard on three different occasions say that Israel has received more military help from this administration than any other. However, obviously Obama and Netanyahu don't get along well at all, as was the relationship between George H.W. Bush and Netanyahu whereas the latter wouldn't even talk to him after a while.

Well, I pretty much anticipated that this was coming, and let me "commend" you for your utter blatant hypocrisy. If you looked up above what you wrote, you mentioned about the Democrats past, but now that the shoe is on the other foot, you whine.

You invent stories to blame Obama for all sorts of bizarre things, but we're not supposed to point out the fact that there's been significant improvement since Bush? Your Obama-bashing is fine and dandy with you, but if someone even mention so many things are better now than with Bush, that's not fine and dandy? What hypocrisy.

Unlike you, I've not been bashing a president, nor questioning even his patriotism, the latter of which is about as unethical as one could be. Unlike you, I've not twisted good things to try and make them look bad. Unlike you, I don't put money ahead of the well-being of Americans. Unlike you, I don't twist the subject like you did with the "anti-colonialism" issue so as to create a straw-man. Unlike you, I didn't derail the thread so the Guiliani-based OP became an attack on Obama instead.

So, I'm going back to the topic here, and you can post whatever you want to post about Obama, but then don't you dare whine if someone derails any thread you start.

I have to close out my browser out because my time sheet is stuck loading. I will look at the rest later.

 

[metis]

It is funny how you always claim to have been offended by some remark yet your the only one who makes offensive statement like the above. I was going to say the exact same thing as you kept throwing everything but the kitchen sink into the conversation. I even typed it twice but thought I would be more civil and instead responded to each of your claims. You ever notice how people always suspect others are doing what they themselves do? Thieves always think someone is stealing from them, racists think everyone is being racist, and those who are offensive towards others always are complaining of others being offensive. Anyway, don't throw out dozens of claim without evidence unless you want responses to them with evidence. You can fit half a dozen assertions in a sentence but you can't disapprove them in a paragraph.

Comparison with what? is this going to devolve into a Bush bashing contest. I guess Obama is always going to be better than something somewhere, I can't predict what your going to compare him to.

What does that even mean? I tried to look up, I found dozens of ways of measuring the market and dozens of explanations for it that had little to do with Obama.

Oh come off it, the government does not pay for anything it's self and it does not offer anything that does not cost money. If my taxes are not paying for it, what is? Are there special money printers just for medical insurance? I looked into it to make sure, taxes are definitely part of what is funding Obama care. Since you want me to post less I will see your inflation and raise you a premium cost. As a percentage of annual income health care premiums were 12% 2000 and are now 24%, and I will throw in a percentage of Americans putting off treatment because of cost. It was 19% in 2000 and 33% currently.

I find this liberal tactic detestable. To claim financial responsibility is to be against another health or discriminatory is detestable. I wish we had the economic power to grant everyone free health care, a free house, a free car, we could import everyone else poor, and supply the world food requirements. We don't. Loading cargo on a ship is a great idea until that cargo finally sinks it and it no longer has the ability to carry anything.



And you accuse me of throwing anything at the wall I can find. How is condemning all the Baptist churches I apparently own and did not know it, the KKK, or calling democrats republicans a defense of Obama.



Was it? What does the stock market have to do with that or Obama? You made some bizarre point about whether I would want another nation to take me over. I responded to it.



The stock market was where I found more claims of voodoo mathematics than any point you made. I actually spent an hour trying to find a consensus view on the stack market. I couldn't. I either found Obama has miracled it into the greatest thing that ever had occurred, it is a bubble that is about to explode like Clinton's and Carter's housing bubble, or was prospering in spite of Obama. Every site I checked (and it was several dozen had a unique take on it). One place where the math is a problem is that the federal rates are said to be the main influence, IOW you can literally create a false temporary gain in the markets by artificially setting interest rates.

Our relations are better with the Brits, and Shimon Peres I have personally heard on three different occasions say that Israel has received more military help from this administration than any other. However, obviously Obama and Netanyahu don't get along well at all, as was the relationship between George H.W. Bush and Netanyahu whereas the latter wouldn't even talk to him after a while.



I have to close out my browser out because my time sheet is stuck loading. I will look at the rest later.

I couldn't care less what you write later as I am not longer interested in having a "discussion" with a person who twists and turn things around so black becomes white and white becomes black. You invent stories to avoid reality, and I'm certainly not the only one here whom has said pretty much the same thing.

For example, for you to claim we can't help provide basic health care for all Americans because it's too expensive is a blatant and pathetic lie, as the next 19 most industrialized countries do just that. For you to elevate money over helping keep Americans both alive and healthy is about as immoral as one could be.

We got into two wars because roughly 3000 Americans tragically were killed on 9-11, but we were losing between 40,000 and 45,000 Americans per year since 2000 and up until the ACA came into line according to both the non-partisan Kaiser Family Foundation and Harvard University studies, but you supported the wars and quite apparently couldn't care less about the 40,000-45,000 others, not even including the multitudes that have to live with suffering. How pathetic.

Anyhow, I am fed up with both your disingenuous tactics and contrived excuses of how black is white and white is black, post whatever you want to post-- I couldn't care less. Again.

 

[CMike]

Rudy was spot on.

Despite Obama's hatred for Israel, the US still needs Israel.

Every day very bad people in the middle east are planning mass attacks within the US. The US needs intelligence information to stop these attacks.

There is a war in the shadows.

There is only one country in the middle east that is ready, willing, and able to help the US. That country is Israel.

Obama took away ground forces, which means they can't capture terrorists there and interrogate them.

Where do you think this intelligence to stop mass attacks in the US is coming from? Heck Turkey is probably financing the people planning the attacks.

 

[maggie2]

Well, here we go again:

The former New York mayor, speaking in front of the 2016 Republican presidential contender and about 60 right-leaning business executives and conservative media types, directly challenged Obama’s patriotism, discussing what he called weak foreign policy decisions and questionable public remarks when confronting terrorists.

“I do not believe, and I know this is a horrible thing to say, but I do not believe that the president loves America,” Giuliani said during the dinner at the 21 Club, a former Prohibition-era speakeasy in midtown Manhattan. “He doesn’t love you. And he doesn’t love me. He wasn’t brought up the way you were brought up and I was brought up through love of this country.”

With Walker sitting just a few seats away, Giuliani continued by saying that “with all our flaws we’re the most exceptional country in the world. I’m looking for a presidential candidate who can express that, do that and carry it out.”...

“What country has left so many young men and women dead abroad to save other countries without taking land? This is not the colonial empire that somehow he has in his hand. I’ve never felt that from him. I felt that from [George] W. [Bush]. I felt that from [Bill] Clinton. I felt that from every American president, including ones I disagreed with, including [Jimmy] Carter. I don’t feel that from President Obama.” -- Rudy Giuliani: President Obama doesn’t love America - Darren Samuelsohn - POLITICO


Thoughts?

Well, I'm a Canadian and not an American but I do have an opinion about this. When 9/11 happened everyone got behind Giuliani and Bush, including Democrats and that's as it should have been. It would be really nice to see the Republicans get behind the current president like the Democrats did back on 9/11. Republicans have done not one thing but try to tear this president down since day one. Look, I'm no Obama fan, but I am for supporting the office holder and not trying to rip them apart.

When Bill Clinton was in office the Republicans came after him. Newt Gingrich was on his case constantly about his affairs. Come to find out, Gingrich was having an affair of his own at the same time. What a hypocrite! During Bush's term you didn't see that kind of negative vengeance against him by the Democrats. Now a Democrat is in again and the crap of tearing him down was actually started even before he came into office. It's time for the Republicans to grow up and put country ahead of party. It's been a long time since they have done that.